Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 process

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Fri, 28 March 2014 02:13 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D35DA1A0286 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 19:13:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h91DmvGkfsob for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 19:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com [72.246.2.115]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F86B1A002F for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 19:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 715584768A; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 02:13:35 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from prod-mail-relay07.akamai.com (unknown [172.17.121.112]) by prod-mail-xrelay07.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64D6E47689; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 02:13:35 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from usma1ex-cashub.kendall.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-cashub5.kendall.corp.akamai.com [172.27.105.21]) by prod-mail-relay07.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6216A8006C; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 02:13:35 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.107.26]) by USMA1EX-CASHUB5.kendall.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.105.21]) with mapi; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 22:13:34 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>, Sean Turner <TurnerS@ieca.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 22:13:33 -0400
Thread-Topic: [TLS] TLS 1.3 process
Thread-Index: Ac9KD81vRX0mqvpfS8iFYnhyH1avmQAG3XzQ
Message-ID: <2A0EFB9C05D0164E98F19BB0AF3708C711FD4AE6CE@USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
References: <AF370E26-CA97-4CE3-9CC7-2F0939FE2B71@ieca.com> <CACsn0cms8=BcBA9Z91wy8kUWbrshfThhKx3YOHnjtnPWddQMaw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACsn0cms8=BcBA9Z91wy8kUWbrshfThhKx3YOHnjtnPWddQMaw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/iPygfITPxwVP4V8f34KR9WuH1HQ
Cc: "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 process
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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/options/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: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 02:13:39 -0000

Does it make sense to consider splitting tls-ng a/k/a tls-2.0 into a separate WG?

--  
Principal Security Engineer
Akamai Technology
Cambridge, MA