Re: [Last-Call] [secdir] [Uta] Secdir telechat review of draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-09

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 9:47 AM Paul Wouters <paul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jul 2022, Rob Sayre wrote:

> cover the maximal-compatibility concerns for 1.2, but recommend 1.3 and don't require 1.2.

If someone wrote a new app implementation and follows this advise by
only implementing TLS 1.3, how well would it interoperate with existing
apps/servers it needs to talk to? I feel this would not go well.

It would likely be fine for almost all applications. Here is some data on the matter:

https://caniuse.com/tls1-3

 
The text could say something along the lines of "SHOULD implement TLS
1.2 unless it is known that for its application TLS 1.3 is widely
available, or is a Green Field deployment where all parties are known
to support TLS 1.3".

This is the right way to use SHOULD (with a clear explanation), but I still don't agree, and that's ok.

thanks,
Rob
 
-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux