I support the adoption of this; seems pretty straightforward.
But isn't it possible to point specifications like RFC 8314 to a BCP
somewhere so that we don't need to revise everything that references TLS
whenever there is a version update? Seems like a lot of unnecessary work.
If 8314 is being replaced rather than updated, there are a few other
things that could be done at the same time:
* Address the outstanding erratum
* Update the reference to MTA-STS
* Possibly include reference to REQUIRETLS, especially for message
submission
-Jim
On 11/7/18 9:52 PM, Valery Smyslov wrote:
Hi,
the chairs received a request for adoption of
draft-lvelvindron-tls-for-email-02 [1] as UTA WG document.
The draft seems to be in scope of UTA WG and follows the IETF trend to
deprecate using insecure protocols.
Please send your comments to the list whether you support the adoption.
Please give your reasons in case you don't support the adoption.
Regards,
Leif & Valery.
[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lvelvindron-tls-for-email
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
