Draft: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Commentary: It might be clearer to have the document update RFC 8447 instead of obsolete . This would make the changes more targeted and may make the document easier to review and apply to the existing registry . It also contains text for issue 
 rewrote Extensions section as an update instead of obsolete . Included proposal for recommended note 
 Obsoleting RFC 8447 means duplicating a lot of text and making changes to it which makes the document have awkward wording and makes the changes difficult to follow . I think it would be clearer if it were an update and just listed the changes . see Extension Types PR 
 At IETF 115 , there was general agreement that this document could be an update as opposed to an obsolete to make it easier on IANA . 
 Some registries have values that are reserved because the values were " burned " . These values are not in private use space but are mid - range , 40 in the ExtensionType registry . Should we mark these as " D " ? 
 I think we should make those as D. Addressed in PR 
 agreed . Will close this out . 
 Currently the I - D includes the following note : Note : : If an item is not marked as " Recommended " , it does not necessarily mean that it is flawed ; rather , it indicates that the item either has not been through the IETF consensus process , has limited applicability , or is intended only for specific use cases . Now that we have three values do we need to expand this to also include " D " . 
 Proposed text in PR
Updated the "Reference" to refer to this document instead of
RFC8447.
See expert-pool for additional information about the designated
expert pool.
Add a "Recommended" column with the contents as listed below.
This table has been generated by marking Standards Track RFCs as
"Y", "truncated_hmac" (4) and "connection_id (deprecated)" (53) as
"D", and all others as "N".  The "Recommended" column is assigned
a value of "N" unless explicitly requested, and adding a value
with a "Recommended" value of "Y" requires Standards Action
RFC8126.  IESG Approval is REQUIRED for a Y->N, Y->D, and D->Y|N
transitions.
The extensions added by I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis are omitted from the
above table.  Likewise, extensions defined after RFC8447 are also not
listed in the table as those RFCs specify the value of the
extension's "Recommended"; extensions points defined after RFC8447
include token_binding, compress_certificate, record_size_limit,
pwd_protect, pwd_clear, password_salt, ticket_pinning,
tls_cert_with_extern_psk, delegated_credentials,
supported_ekt_ciphers, connection_id, external_id_hash,
external_session_id, quic_transport_parameters, ticket_request, and
dnssec_chain.
I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis also uses the TLS ExtensionType Values
registry originally created in RFC4366.  The following text is from
I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and is included here to ensure alignment
between these specifications.
IANA [SHALL update/has updated] this registry to include the
"key_share", "pre_shared_key", "psk_key_exchange_modes",
"early_data", "cookie", "supported_versions",
"certificate_authorities", "oid_filters", "post_handshake_auth",
and "signature_algorithms_cert", extensions with the values
defined in I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and the "Recommended" value of
"Y".
IANA [SHALL update/has updated] this registry to include a "TLS
1.3" column that lists the messages in which the extension may
appear.  This column [SHALL be/has been] initially populated from
the table in Section 4.2 of I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis with any
extension not listed there marked as "-" to indicate that it is
not used by TLS 1.3.
Add a reference to this document under the reference heading.
Update the "Recommended" column with the changes as listed below.
This table has been generated by keeping existing "Y" and "N"
entries except for "truncated_hmac" (4), "connection_id
(deprecated)" (53), "reserved" (40) and "Reserved" (46) as "D".  A
reference to this document SHALL be added to these entries.