Re: [TLS] Implementing https://svn.resiprocate.org/rep/ietf-drafts/ekr/draft-rescorla-tls-rene got iate.txt

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Mon, 09 November 2009 01:50 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 976203A6405 for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Nov 2009 17:50:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.396
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.396 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.203, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kjS2oM6rgCCl for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Nov 2009 17:50:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from odin.smetech.net (mail.smetech.net [208.254.26.82]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99ED53A635F for <tls@ietf.org>; Sun, 8 Nov 2009 17:50:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [208.254.26.81]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEAE29A477D; Sun, 8 Nov 2009 20:50:41 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net
Received: from odin.smetech.net ([208.254.26.82]) by localhost (ronin.smetech.net [208.254.26.81]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ypDiEKQswMYj; Sun, 8 Nov 2009 20:50:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: from THINKPADR52.vigilsec.com (host-24-32.meeting.ietf.org [133.93.24.32]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE35E9A471B; Sun, 8 Nov 2009 20:50:39 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 20:50:34 -0500
To: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <87y6mg3b5v.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
References: <1b587cab0911080935m64eabca8t6f7f6dfb9a666d06@mail.gmail.com> <p06240806c71ce60888e1@[133.93.128.35]> <87y6mg3b5v.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Message-Id: <20091109015039.CE35E9A471B@odin.smetech.net>
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Implementing https://svn.resiprocate.org/rep/ietf-drafts/ekr/draft-rescorla-tls-rene got iate.txt
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
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/listinfo/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: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 01:50:21 -0000

> >>At some point soon, I guess we'll be releasing an update. It'd be good
> >>not to consume an experimental extension number in the process - how
> >>do we get a real one allocated?
> >
> > When an extension goes on Standards Track, it can get an extension
> > number.
>
>The registry requires "IETF consensus".  Does this really imply a
>standards track RFC?

No.  It means there must be an IETF Last Call.

Russ