On Thu, Feb 13, 2020, at 10:01, Carrick Bartle wrote: > I'm brand new to the IETF, so please forgive me if I'm totally off base > here, but my understanding is that Informational RFCs are explicitly > not recommendations (let alone mandates)?
This would of course be information, but my comment was about phrasing. This document comes off as being quite prescriptive, where it doesn't really need to be. Absent actual algorithms, it's just a set of guidelines. That's reflected in its Informational status, but it would be better if the verbiage also reflected that more clearly. To address Stephen's comment at the same time: I think that we can publish an RFC on this before the competition completes if it is just a framework. That might in fact make standardizing the one true composite scheme easier. _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
