Re: [dtn] IESG feedback for draft-ietf-dtn-tcpclv4

On 24 Feb 2020, at 17:53, Brian Sipos wrote:

> All,
> I'm in progress of reviewing comments from [1]. Many of these are 
> phrasing or spelling (and I will try to run the text version through a 
> spell checker to catch more typos). Some are typos from the split of 
> Contact Header from SESS_INIT message, with no change in specified 
> behavior.
>
> Several substantial comments are around the use of TLS or specific 
> version of TLS required that will need some change in specifications. 
> A few comments were questioning the optional use of TLS, for which I 
> am going to stick with the earlier WG decision to keep TLS 
> mandatory-to-implement but not mandatory-to-use. There are also 
> comments of whether supporting TLS 1.2 is necessary now that TLS 1.3 
> is approved and in many implementations. Are there any WG objections 
> to making TLS 1.3 the specified baseline version?

as individual, TLS1.3 has key advantages and given its very spread use 
and availability in libraries, I think we should use 1.3 as base.

Marc.

> This would not preventing an implementation to negotiate down to 1.2, 
> or some earlier version allowed by local policy for that matter.
>
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dtn-tcpclv4/ballot/

> _______________________________________________
> dtn mailing list
> dtn@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn