I support moving both drafts to standards track. For ECH, there is a definite need to encrypt the SNI and other fields as a complement to using encrypted DNS. We have implemented draft versions, and will implement and use the final certain of ECH + HTTPSSVC.
For cTLS, this is a prime candidate for use by future versions of QUIC. Since that would want to be a normative reference from a standards track document, it would need to be standards track at the time it was used. Thanks, Tommy > On May 21, 2020, at 7:11 PM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > It looks like the intended status for both draft-ietf-tls-ctls (aka cTLS) > and draft-ietf-tls-esni (aka ECH) should be changed. It appears that both > should be set to standards track; cTLS is now Informational and ECH is > Experimental. If you object to changing the track for either of these drafts > please send an email to the list stating why by 2359 UTC on 5 June 2020. > > Cheers, > spt (for the Chairs) > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
