Datagram Transport Layer Security Version 1.2
RFC 6347

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.

(Robert Sparks) Yes

(Sean Turner) Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

Comment (2011-01-17 for -)

(Stewart Bryant) No Objection

Comment (2011-01-19 for -)

(Gonzalo Camarillo) No Objection

(Ralph Droms) No Objection

(Lars Eggert) No Objection

(Adrian Farrel) (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2011-01-20)
I support Alexey's Discuss about description of the changes since/to 4347


Should the version numbering be recorded by IANA?


How is wrapping of epoch and sequence number handled? Or is it considered that they will never need to wrap?


It might be valuable to repeat the UDP warning from in section 5


Section 4.3

   This section includes specifications for the data structures that
   have changed between TLS 1.2 and DTLS.

I think s/DTLS/DTLS 1.2/


(Russ Housley) (was Discuss) No Objection

Alexey Melnikov (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2011-01-02)
SCTP, RC4, SCTP-AUTH should have Informative references.

(Tim Polk) No Objection

Comment (2011-01-20 for -)
placeholder for Charlie Kaufman's secdir review - this deserves a response.  I made this a comment since I know that the sponsoring AD intends to seem them addressed.

(Dan Romascanu) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Peter Saint-Andre) No Objection

Comment (2011-01-18 for -)
I support Alexey's DISCUSS regarding the need for a section describing the changes from DTLS 1.0 (RFC 4347).