Viktor Dukhovni <[email protected]> writes: >Peter, is there anything beyond TLS-TLS that you're looking to see work on? >Is the issue foreclosing on opportunities to do anticipated necessary work, >or is it mostly that the statement that the work can't happen causing >disruption with audits and other bureaucratic issues?
I can't foresee anything, but I also can't predict what the future will bring. It's more a case of some currently unknown thing cropping up and an RFC saying you can't make any changes preventing anything being done, at least in a published-standard manner. If it really is necessary to publish an RFC like this then perhaps text along the lines of "you can't add major new features but performing maintenance is OK" would work, although overall I still can't see why such an RFC is necessary in the first place. Peter. _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
