Re: [Unbearable] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-tokbind-negotiation-11: (with COMMENT)

[John Bradley <[e-mail]>]

Hi Mirja

Because of differences between TLS 1.2 and 1.3 we split the TLS 1.3 considerations into a separate spec

In trying to organize the WG’s documents we split TLS1.3 into its own document.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tokbind-tls13/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tokbind-tls13/>

Basically the negotiation will use Encrypted extensions in TLS 1.3 so TLS 1.3 is out of scope for this spec.

I hope we can progress the TLS 1.3 spec quickly as TLS1.3 itself is nearing the end of it’s long road to become a RFC.

Regards
John B.

> On Apr 26, 2018, at 2:19 PM, Mirja Kühlewind <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-tokbind-negotiation-11: No Objection
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tokbind-negotiation/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> One quick question: Why does this spec not cover TLS1.3?
> 
>