[TLS] Re: BRAID IETF 126 Hackathon

[George Davey <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Thanks for the interest — glad to have you. Quick status: -01 goes up as soon as the pre-meeting submission window reopens. It's a substantial restructure, not a tidy-up, so it's worth waiting for rather than reading -00. Draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-davey-tls-braid/ Code: https://github.com/braid2026/BRAID The idea in one line: build independent circuit breakers into ordinary web certificates, so that any authorization the owner appoints can be withdrawn to invalidate the certificate — and because invalidation is reliable and doesn't involve the CA, the certificate no longer has to be short-lived. What changed in -01, and why it matters if you're thinking about contributing: Eric Rescorla reviewed -00 and pointed out that its mandatory 7-day credential refresh just relocated the renewal treadmill rather than removing it — which was the opposite of my intent. -01 separates authorization (published once, persists until withdrawn) from revocation latency (how fast a withdrawal propagates). In the base profile you publish one DNSSEC-signed record and then do nothing; short-interval refresh is now an optional enhancement. -01 also concedes openly what it costs: you run conventional certs alongside during any transition, and the DNSSEC dependency is real and unsolved. So the design is genuinely live right now, which I think makes this a good moment to jump in rather than a bad one. The open questions I'd most value help on for -02: - Wire formats — the braid_chain extension, the BRAIDBinding extension, and the Anchor record are deliberately unspecified in -01. That's the biggest concrete gap. - Revocation latency: what bound is defensible, and how should relying party caching be constrained? - The DNSSEC validation modes in §14 — whether the "validated material" mode is actually workable for general clients. - Whether owner-appointed third-party invalidation (the Witness strand) is a feature or a liability. If any of that is your area, say so and I'll loop you in directly. Happy to talk through any of it before -01 even lands. Thanks, George

From: Nico Frati <[e-mail]>
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2026 4:32 AM
To: George Davey <[e-mail]>
Subject: BRAID IETF 126 Hackathon

 EXTERNAL
________________________________
Hello George, nice to meet you!

I'm Nico Frati, I was interested to help getting BRAID phase 0 done, but I couldn't seem to find the project on the hackathon room, is there another place where the team is at?

Thanks,
Nico