100% support the BCP route. -- V/R, Uri
On 12/22/22, 10:16, "TLS on behalf of Peter Gutmann" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: Hal Murray <[email protected]> writes: >Would a BCP be a better approach? That might provide a good setting to >discuss the issues. There is no reason to limit a BCP to TLSv1.2 or FFDHE. That seems like a much better idea. A deprecate RFC can only say "no" while a BCP can cover alternatives, in this situation do this, in that situation do that. Peter. _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
