Re: [TLS] Confirming consensus: TLS1.3->TLS*

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Tony Arcieri <bascule@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 8:43 PM, Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> > I actually completely agree with Timothy Jackson's recent posting:
>> >
>> >   After 15 years, everyone but us still calls it SSL. We need to
>> >   admit that we lost the marketing battle and plan for a world where
>> >   everyone calls “TLS X” “SSL X”. Even “new” implementations call
>> >   themselves “LibreSSL” and “BoringSSL” rather than “LibreTLS” or
>> >   “BoringTLS”.
>>
>> I'll drink to that!
>
>
> I will also +1 this and add that if the goal is to reduce confusion, a last
> minute renaming of TLS 1.3 to something else probably won't accomplish that,
> but will rather create more confusion. There's already ample material out
> there (papers, presentations, mailing list discussions, etc) which talks
> about "TLS 1.3". Rebranding it now would add an additional bit of errata
> everyone needs to learn if they ever encountered the "TLS 1.3" version in
> any of these materials. And I think the whole SSL/TLS thing is errata
> enough.

So what should X be in above email? Clearly it should be \geq 4.

>
> --
> Tony Arcieri
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>

-- 
"Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains".
--Rousseau.