[TLS] Do we really update RFC 8422 in 8446-bis?
Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Fri, 30 May 2025 15:47 UTC
Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: tls@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: tls@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 154E22ECFC50 for <tls@mail2.ietf.org>; Fri, 30 May 2025 08:47:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.497
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GHahTBvBeL17 for <tls@mail2.ietf.org>; Fri, 30 May 2025 08:47:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb31.google.com (mail-yb1-xb31.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b31]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19C902ECFBAE for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 May 2025 08:47:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb31.google.com with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-e7dc3df7ac3so2241270276.3 for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 May 2025 08:47:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1748620045; x=1749224845; darn=ietf.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=rHpzgBm6qtCasAyGqRD3zS9tvKQz0Fe1PhbAzZrr5JI=; b=pN9RdDEvadMIfEJtQnDSvOohkFhaFk5sqRC745cz4ln86eoN+A8PvcQUJrjHLj7dlf QHZju6hONS9dXNMMt3J2+rZqkZ8hkaV+98NG2ZFrf2uRtEYpf05fR4ry7lguwIdeg+yK zhBSLenTW+tL0B2Qj5qlCJoh3O+ILNsrqQhAGlqvdfm0VghZGxvgX1HSkMJLgBA+Mr19 eUKxLXFxzzGvrhy4wkkZB+F/rNV65Y9tgckz/c6lTo80HQHbM7LdAt4lFK1D+Pfmjsmw s8Gywh0gT3Fkfjtmtu2ks9IMI85cAWgIrQB95gHWvet1kK3iFJ6RGjjn8CBMD9F7v9H7 KtzA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1748620045; x=1749224845; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=rHpzgBm6qtCasAyGqRD3zS9tvKQz0Fe1PhbAzZrr5JI=; b=JIxn/drQ4tzPH8CkVi7wuAF95BIzZQCv2lb/rYAGpm3735knwbvVEjpEuBjURk5I7x 6lE3QddQytVkYiLnIHCfakkzRMWBHUmKdyTRDcXjto9vM/B9+BURxKj+aa2+fkvXjdjk uQcxi9gaxWxECUswwgnxlvALHwaPp6cO9/ZpY9+ar/ieFldUbinn4Tcoy+23z41NV/2A 8PrnVWTv60abBEjgSu1in4l5r6szZ+1IYcjelIFZel5dI/hI8cqbHlaaqvRu9u8YBlMu VTi7aCCtUW7Oj5wPCPEhgDcTmgp/smNco7HxrKeH+WnOMRgNSjjnuAY+C+2ny7zwwxTq JuJA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YylP2NiwJFAIEY3fMYKiJ9jzLG/meFTJ9XD+P1+1kgmnPvo0bTM hT4X6qvGXeoq26jD6qX0iVD3U/KPOvqCDuGWan6ROQvWw5d0Xw60Jp5TNGm4fGO4qHmCGcCp8WP kA6KKJuzS1maADcPFFfrUZInh+jKvn4iUf3qg03vQDFb7waIgSah+
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvRoJHsmSwtDOrLNzT8d5+tnA5eZW4klk8PNUTLaEc9NYXpsvQb54CG4wHOYlB 99Ltu1d6/GKSNi4Np2OCI/IbygQMlj0sJ4UpeQW6JpID1pqyCTA8Z1O/ZtNk5IwxhgH662Xfoiv OQ2M4BV/bN+ZHEaM7hx47sdgkA438hhsbsmtM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFuT5MYs2vf00f/WOq6YmLzcE+bGwW9IcLRWPxViM0ngxIKL3+n3lEmYjtGFH+SVvG4EbhitYXEZLsgGOL7rGM=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:703:b0:e7d:75e4:a9d5 with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-e7f81a2c6b5mr5148616276.0.1748620045152; Fri, 30 May 2025 08:47:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2025 08:46:49 -0700
X-Gm-Features: AX0GCFukAKhAcjk1c8ei-tlt8aNWc1IJoUMixC5U2n1OuGlFEr3YR3bSKaQTuqs
Message-ID: <CABcZeBM9a90HuTovaPEL3wrx1MUWE0v0-RX12pirBRwRXnw+4g@mail.gmail.com>
To: "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a386cd06365c5423"
Message-ID-Hash: TB5YMUNHLNURLQMJYWHTYV24FLGF6T4D
X-Message-ID-Hash: TB5YMUNHLNURLQMJYWHTYV24FLGF6T4D
X-MailFrom: ekr@rtfm.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tls.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [TLS] Do we really update RFC 8422 in 8446-bis?
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/aSP1iDByT7GxZulVgWrsdavPIVI>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tls-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tls-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tls-leave@ietf.org>
I see we list this RFC 8422 (ECC Cipher Suites) as "Updated". I'm actually not sure what updates we make here. Does anyone want to weigh in here? Should we remove it? -Ekr
- [TLS] Do we really update RFC 8422 in 8446-bis? Eric Rescorla
- [TLS] Re: Do we really update RFC 8422 in 8446-bi… Salz, Rich
- [TLS] Re: Do we really update RFC 8422 in 8446-bi… Eric Rescorla
- [TLS] Re: Do we really update RFC 8422 in 8446-bi… Salz, Rich
- [TLS] Re: Do we really update RFC 8422 in 8446-bi… Sean Turner
- [TLS] Re: Do we really update RFC 8422 in 8446-bi… Eric Rescorla
- [TLS] Re: Do we really update RFC 8422 in 8446-bi… Sean Turner