On Nov 30, 2009, at 5:37 PM, The IESG wrote: > The IESG has received a request from the Transport Layer Security WG > (tls) to consider the following document: > > - 'Transport Layer Security (TLS) Renegotiation Indication Extension ' > <draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation-01.txt> as a Proposed Standard > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2009-12-14. Exceptionally, > comments may be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please > retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. I oppose publishing the current draft. There are two unresolved issues still being discussed on the TLS mailing list: 1. non-extension signaling for older versions (SSLv3 and maybe TLS 1.0) 2. explicit vs implicit addition of old verify_data to the PRF (also known as fail-unsafe vs fail-safe) I think the WG is converging, and that a couple of more weeks of discussion may lead to consensus. I agree with David-Sarah Hopwood that a last call (WG or IETF) is still premature. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf