[TLS] Re: Adoption call for TLS 1.2 Update for Long-term Support

[Rob Sayre <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Nov 5, 2024 at 8:25 AM Sean Turner <[e-mail]> wrote:

> REQUEST: Let’s not rehash all the context.  It is provided for those who
> might not remember or those that were not around for the duration.
>
> CONTEXT: Way back in 2016 after the WG had embarked on developing TLS 1.3,
> Peter Gutmann suggested that another way to “fix” TLS was to specify a
> version of TLS that indicates a “known-good config drawn from the maybe 10
> extension-RFCs”; see [0].  Peter submitted his “TLS 1.2 Update for
> Long-term Support”; see [1]. There was some list discussion; see [2]. Peter
> asked us about adopting the I-D; see [3]. He made changes based on that
> feedback; see [4]. At IETF 98, the WG discussed adopting this I-D and the
> sense of the room was to not adopt the I-D; see [5]. Progress on this
> document was paused while the WG worked on TLS 1.3. Once RFC 8447 was
> published, a code point was assigned for the “tls-lts” extensions; see [6]
> and [7]. Now that we are looking to publish Feature Freeze for TLS 1.2
> [8][9] we want to make sure that the working group sentiment has not
> changed over time so we are running an adoption call for TLS-LTS.
>
> MESSAGE: This message is to judge consensus on whether there is support to
> adopt TLS 1.2 Update for Long-term Support; see [1].  If you support
> adoption and are willing to review and contribute text, please send a
> message to the list.  If you do not support adoption of this draft, please
> send a message to the list and indicate why.  This call will close on
> November X, 2024.
>

I do not support adoption, but do not view it as what they call an "end
run" around the WG. So, it would be fine to go to the ISE I think. If it
gets some traction, the WG can take it up again. It's not a permanent
decision.

thanks,
Rob