Hiya,
On 12/01/2021 18:14, Robert Wilton via Datatracker wrote:
Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate-11: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for purging the old versions of TLS.
Thanks for trudging through it! :-)
There is one sentence in the abstract that I found surprising (if it is right).
The abstract states: "TLSv1.2 has been the
recommended version for IETF protocols since 2008, providing
sufficient time to transition away from older versions."
Should this be "minimum recommended version"? Otherwise, I don't understand
why the recommended version of TLS is 1.2 rather than 1.3 (given that the TLS
1.2 RFC is marked as obsolete).
I see what you mean. I guess s/has been/became/ would do it? The point isn't so much what the current recommended version is/was but more that it's been a dozen years since it was TLSv1.1. Cheers, S.
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
OpenPGP_0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
