Re: TLS requirements (Last Call: draft-ietf-atompub-protocol to Proposed Standard)

[Brian E Carpenter <brc at zurich.ibm.com>]

On 2007-03-13 20:43, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> --On March 13, 2007 3:23:22 PM -0400 Robert Sayre <rsayre at mozilla.com> 
> wrote:
>
> > This text is actively misleading, because it suggests RFC 4346 is
> > included for informational purposes. The text should read:
> >
> > "At a minimum, client and server implementations MUST be capable of
> >  being configured to use HTTP Basic Authentication [RFC2617] in
> >  conjunction with a TLS connection as specified by [RFC2818] and
> >  [RFC4346]."
>
> The text that got used in CalDAV (which is about to be published) is:
>
>   o  MUST support transport over TLS [RFC2246] as defined in [RFC2818]
>      (note that [RFC2246] has been obsoleted by [RFC4346]);
>
> with 2246, 2818 and 4346 all normative references. These type of 
> "up-references" are not ideal and I believe there was some discussion 
> going on somewhere about how better to deal with this type of situation.

You may be thinking of draft-klensin-norm-ref, which is in Last Call
as BCP through Friday this week.

Just to confirm: 2818 has already been "downrefed" so it can be used in
this way without further formality.

http://www1.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/DownrefRegistry

    Brian

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf