Re: [TLS] Please discuss: draft-housley-evidence-extns-00<

We need a private range for TLS extensions, then. But, this 
would require IESG review of an update to a standards track 
document. Lets not bother with that lio.

Or, we introduce immediately introduce an extension with 
value .next, whose specification says: anyone can use this 
as a basis for experiment. This Private extension MUST be 
used with a ciphersuite declared in the private range of 
ciphersuites.

Nothing prevents a private community declaring private 
ciphersuite X is identical with RSA_RC4_MD5.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Russ Housley" <housley@vigilsec.com>
To: "Peter Gutmann" <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Cc: <tls@ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 11:39 PM
Subject: Re: [TLS] Please discuss: 
draft-housley-evidence-extns-00<

> Peter:
>
> The TLS IANA rules require a Standards-Track document to 
> allocate the content type number.
>
> Russ
>
> At 08:15 PM 1/26/2007, Peter Gutmann wrote:
>>Nelson B Bolyard <nelson@bolyard.com> writes:
>>
>> >I still have not heard a convincing case that this stuff 
>> >belongs in TLS.
>> >There doesn't seem to be consensus in the WG that it 
>> >belongs in TLS, either.
>>
>>I've already pointed this out before, why not make it an 
>>Experimental RFC?
>>That's exactly what they're there for.
>>
>>Peter.
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>TLS mailing list
>>TLS@lists.ietf.org
>>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
> 

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls