Re: [TLS] Straw poll on TLS SRP status

[Jeffrey Altman <jaltman at secure-endpoints.com>]

Pasi.Eronen at nokia.com wrote:
> Folks,
>
> The one remaining issue with TLS SRP is its intended status (Proposed
> Standard, Informational, or Experimental). I and Eric think we need
> more data to determine consensus here, so this message starts a
> two-week straw poll on this issue. (Our apologies that this has 
> taken so long; this poll should have been some time ago already.)
>
> The question is: Do you support advancing draft-ietf-tls-srp as 
> Proposed Standard? 
>
>    [ ] Yes.
>    [ ] I think Informational/Experimental is better.
>    [ ] I don't care about the status, just get it published.
>    [ ] Something else, please state:
>
> You may reply either on the list, or privately to the chairs.
I vote Yes.  Proposed Standard.
>
> Some points you may wish to consider, summarizing some of the
> arguments made earlier:
>
> - The document describing SRP-3 (not exactly the same 
>   algorithm as here), RFC 2945, is Proposed Standard.
RFC 2944, Telnet Authentication SRP is also proposed standard.
There are several commercial and open source implementations of RFC 2944
and RFC 2945. 
Those same parties are likely to add support for TLS-SRP as well.

Jeffrey Altman
Secure Endpoints Inc.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls