Deprecating TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1
draft-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate-12

Yes

Erik Kline
Murray Kucherawy
Roman Danyliw
Warren Kumari
Éric Vyncke
(Alissa Cooper)
(Barry Leiba)
(Benjamin Kaduk)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Martin Duke)

No Objection

(Alvaro Retana)
(Martin Vigoureux)
(Robert Wilton)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 11 and is now closed.

Erik Kline
Yes
Murray Kucherawy
Yes
Roman Danyliw
Yes
Comment (2021-01-19 for -11) Not sent 
Thank you for the effort to comprehensively modernize the TLS guidance.

Thank you to Adam Montville for the SECDIR review.
Warren Kumari
Yes
Éric Vyncke
Yes
Comment (2021-01-19 for -11) Sent 
Thank you for the work put into this document. 

Special thanks to the shepherd, Sean Turner, who did a great job to describe the WG consensus. Rob Wilton's point about minimum version is also important and should be addressed in the abstract (even if the text is clearer in section 1).

Please find below some nits.

I hope that this helps to improve the document,

Regards,

-éric

-- Abstract --
"This document, if approved, formally deprecates Transport Layer" => should ", if approved," be removed now from the abstract? The RFC Editor will probably do it though.

-- Section 1 --
"deprecate these old versions." should the "these old version" be followed by the enumeration ?
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
Yes
Yes (for -11) Not sent 

                            

                        
                    

                
            
                
                    

                        

                            Barry Leiba Former IESG member
                        

                        

                            
                            Yes
                            
                        

                    

                    

                        

                            

                                Yes 
                                
                                    (2021-01-19 for -11)
                                
                                
                                    
                                         Sent
                                    
                                
                            

                        

                        
                            

                                
I think this is the first time I’ve reviewed a document where the “References” section is longer than the rest of the document combined.

Just a couple of nits:

— Section 1.1 —

   Fallback to these versions are prohibited
   through this update.

Fallback “is” prohibited (not “are”).

— Section 6 —

   This documents updates [RFC7525] Section 3.1.1

“document”, singular.

                            

                        
                    

                
            
                
                    

                        

                            Benjamin Kaduk Former IESG member
                        

                        

                            
                            Yes
                            
                        

                    

                    

                        

                            

                                Yes 
                                
                                    (2021-01-08 for -11)
                                
                                
                                    
                                         Not sent
                                    
                                
                            

                        

                        
                            

                                
The replacement of (e.g.) "TLS 1.0" with "TLSv1.0" affected the quote from the NIST document,
which brings in slightly more divergence from the referenced material.

                            

                        
                    

                
            
                
                    

                        

                            Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
                        

                        

                            
                            Yes
                            
                        

                    

                    

                        

                            

                                Yes 
                                
                                    (for -11)
                                
                                
                                    
                                         Not sent
                                    
                                
                            

                        

                        
                            

                                

                            

                        
                    

                
            
                
                    

                        

                            Martin Duke Former IESG member
                        

                        

                            
                            Yes
                            
                        

                    

                    

                        

                            

                                Yes 
                                
                                    (for -11)
                                
                                
                                    
                                         Not sent
                                    
                                
                            

                        

                        
                            

                                

                            

                        
                    

                
            
        
            
                
                    

                        

                            Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
                        

                        

                            
                            No Objection
                            
                        

                    

                    

                        

                            

                                No Objection 
                                
                                    (for -11)
                                
                                
                                    
                                         Not sent
                                    
                                
                            

                        

                        
                            

                                

                            

                        
                    

                
            
                
                    

                        

                            Martin Vigoureux Former IESG member
                        

                        

                            
                            No Objection
                            
                        

                    

                    

                        

                            

                                No Objection 
                                
                                    (for -11)
                                
                                
                                    
                                         Not sent
                                    
                                
                            

                        

                        
                            

                                

                            

                        
                    

                
            
                
                    

                        

                            Robert Wilton Former IESG member
                        

                        

                            
                            No Objection
                            
                        

                    

                    

                        

                            

                                No Objection 
                                
                                    (2021-01-12 for -11)
                                
                                
                                    
                                         Sent
                                    
                                
                            

                        

                        
                            

                                
Thank you for purging the old versions of TLS.

There is one sentence in the abstract that I found surprising (if it is right).

The abstract states: "TLSv1.2 has been the
   recommended version for IETF protocols since 2008, providing
   sufficient time to transition away from older versions."

Should this be "minimum recommended version"?  Otherwise, I don't understand why the recommended version of TLS is 1.2 rather than 1.3 (given that the TLS 1.2 RFC is marked as obsolete).