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 [email protected] OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
