Update

[Richard Levitte]

On Mon, 20 May 2019 16:05:49 +0200,
Salz, Rich wrote:
> 
>   * The current requirement for inclusion is “national standard” or better.  Thus, this change
>     should be accepted.
> 
> The problem is that they squatted on codepoints that the IETF controls.  So while it is a national
> standard, it is also in conflict with the IETF specifications.

Did they?  For the protocol version, they used something that has
never seen the light of day (0x0003 - 0x02ff is "free" and will most
probably never be used for TLS), and the cipher suites they added are
in a range that's unassigned (0xE0xx).

You *are* correct on one point, though...  the Chinese standard isn't
TLS.  Like Matt says, it's a different protocol, even though it
resembles TLS v1.1 quite a bit.

Cheers,
Richard

-- 
Richard Levitte         levitte at openssl.org
OpenSSL Project         http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/