Hi Paul. That issue is from an offline discussion between the A-Ds, the TRANS WG Chairs, and the 6962-bis authors. Ben K answered those questions (on 3rd Nov 2018) as follows:
"> Do we even need to mark 6962-bis as Updating RFC8446? Creating a new TLS extension does not require uptading the core TLS spec. But the suggested text about "new requirements for [...] TLS implementations" is not good; better to talk about defining an extension that is used for [stuff]. > (Can an Experimental RFC update a Standards Track RFC?) No." I addressed this in PR#302 [1] by adding [2] the following text to the Abstract: "It also specifies a new TLS extension that is used to send various CT log artifacts." [1] https://github.com/google/certificate-transparency-rfcs/pull/302 [2] https://github.com/google/certificate-transparency-rfcs/commit/e18322235c409bf7150eb0b86384fbddaecc9660 On 22/02/2019 15:24, Paul Wouters wrote: > > This issue is still open: > > TLS 1.3 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8446) has several mentions of > the RFC6962 signed_certificate_timestamp TLS extension. Since > 6962-bis > intends to obsolete RFC6962 and replace signed_certificate_timestamp > with a new TLS extension (transparency_info), should we also add a > sentence to the 6962-bis Abstract along these lines... > "This document also specifies new requirements for TLS 1.0, 1.1, > 1.2 > and 1.3 implementations." > ? > > Do we even need to mark 6962-bis as Updating RFC8446? > > (Can an Experimental RFC update a Standards Track RFC?) > > > _______________________________________________ > Trans mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans -- Rob Stradling Senior Research & Development Scientist Email: [email protected] Bradford, UK Office: +441274024707 Sectigo Limited This message and any files associated with it may contain legally privileged, confidential, or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not permitted to use, copy, or forward it, in whole or in part without the express consent of the sender. Please notify the sender by reply email, disregard the foregoing messages, and delete it immediately. _______________________________________________ Trans mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
