[openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.1.1 pre release 9 published

[Robert Moskowitz]

On 08/27/2018 04:55 PM, Benjamin Kaduk via openssl-users wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 04:38:24PM -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>>
>> On 08/27/2018 04:07 PM, Hubert Kario wrote:
>>> On Monday, 27 August 2018 20:57:53 CEST Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>>>> On 08/27/2018 02:33 PM, Hubert Kario wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, 23 August 2018 16:35:01 CEST Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>>>> Over the years and in protocol design development, I have heard too many
>>>> we can't.  So I set about with, "here is one way."  Since then I have
>>>> had a few people actually thank me for making it possible for them to
>>>> build an ecdsa pki for their product testing needs.  Just one justifies
>>>> my effort.
>>> well, I see nothing wrong with providing documentation and how-to's, I just
>>> don't see that it should be elevated to an Internet Draft level...
> Well, see https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wkumari-not-a-draft/ .

Warren is a riot.  I really should have put in a typo comment to him 
about 'safely razor' which probably should be 'safety razor'.  But then 
kind of knowing Warren, this could have been intentional so I left it 
alone. :)

>
>>> by its very nature it needs to be constantly updated, so having it in a static
>>> RFC is contrary to that
>> that is the value of Internet Drafts that many of us IETFers have figured
>> out.  draft versions can just keep on going and the tools will take you to
>> the current draft.  IDs have become neat working documents, though there is
>> more github work coming along.  More workgroups are doing requirements docs
>> that will never be published as RFCs; they will stay as IDs.  Much better
>> source of why did the wg do? than plow through the old mailing list
>> archives.  The IESG is actually encouraging such a use of IDs.
> Yup!  Internet-Draft is a fine terminus for some types of document.
> Many TLS registries now have a registration policy that explicitly calls out
> an internet-draft that is never published as anything else, as a valid specification
> for getting a codepoint assignment.
>
> -Ben