[TLS] rfc7366: status

Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmav@redhat.com> Sat, 06 December 2014 09:58 UTC

Return-Path: <nmavrogi@redhat.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71B2C1A9007 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 01:58:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.512
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.512 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GxRMBCqvj6RP for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 01:58:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx5-phx2.redhat.com (mx5-phx2.redhat.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC2C91A88EF for <tls@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 01:58:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zmail22.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (zmail22.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com []) by mx5-phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id sB69wZss023248; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 04:58:35 -0500
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2014 04:58:35 -0500
From: Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmav@redhat.com>
To: tls <tls@ietf.org>, Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Message-ID: <835421324.7469504.1417859915250.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <545514D4.6010900@polarssl.org>
References: <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C739B9DC255@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> <545514D4.6010900@polarssl.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: []
X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.6_GA_5922 (ZimbraWebClient - FF31 (Linux)/8.0.6_GA_5922)
Thread-Topic: rfc7366: status
Thread-Index: iqHBHOKLM3FLb5ZGbh3nWYG1ss6P3g==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/8I-wgTUnqro7q0KAgac--6wFh3o
Subject: [TLS] rfc7366: status
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2014 09:58:46 -0000

----- Original Message -----
> > If anyone can come up with a clear one-paragraph note (which, when posted
> > to
> > the list, no-one complains about :-), I'd be happy to use that.
> > 
> I didn't see people complain about your text here [1], nor about my fixed
> text
> here [2] so far :)
> [1] http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/3NOHlIUShLo9AAzXx4t2u7QV8Sw
> [2] http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/zYBKe9L9n3tNZ_SBWn77ubLzNPs

 Is there any update on RFC7366 errata process? Is there a plan to update the existing text?