[QUIC] Find out timeline for TLS 1.3 and QUIC v1
From https://www.w3.org/2017/11/07-webscreens-minutes.html#x21:
- ACTION: @schien to check the timeline of TLS 1.3 deployments from Mozilla's editors
(Seems a little silly for this, but I'm filing issues for all TPAC action items)
This Akamai's blogpost has pretty good summary of the current status of TLS 1.3 deployment. The failure rate caused by middlebox is still too high. More information would be available after the IETF 100 held in mid-Nov 2017.
@chrisn to talk with his colleague to get an update on the status of TLS 1.3 deployments.
Here's the info I've been given:
At the current time, TLS 1.3 is at the IESG Review stage of the IETF process. There are many TLS implementations that are converging on that final version.
This blog post from CloudFlare provides more details. According to this, the middlebox issue mentioned by @schien seems to have been mitigated. Also, Chrome enabled TLS 1.3 by default in version 65 while Firefox did so in version 60.
FYI:
- We can see the current status of IESG review at https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php.
- Details about publication process is described in https://www.rfc-editor.org/pubprocess/.
- At this time, the status of draft-ietf-tls-tls13-28 is "EDIT".
Some further information on QUIC: QUIC v1 is intended to be delivered by end of year, where the current focus is on the transport. This page has details of implementations.
Note: v1 is not a formal definition, more the indication that the IETF WG will focus on QUIC for HTTP use case and defer other things such other application layer protocols, multipath, forward error correction etc.
Updated: TLS 1.3 is now RFC 8446.
QUIC v1 was published as four standards track RFCs in ~ May 2021: https://www.akamai.com/blog/performance/http3-and-quic-past-present-and-future
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9000.html
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9001.html
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9002.html
- https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9368
We should update document cross-references where needed, then close this out.
Closed by #310.