Longterm versioning strategy

[dennisjackson]

@thomwiggers:

The one thing that makes me frown a bit is the intended versioning scheme. I don't think consuming identifiers is a problem, but perhaps we can pre-define the code points and variables for the next, say, N=0xff years? Then the versioning mechanism is set for the foreseeable future. (You could even say that we wrap the code points after N years).

As well as the discussion on the mailing list, this was also discussed during the tlswg meeting @ IETF 117. There was no particular consensus on the most suitable strategy.

A related issue is whether this draft will slow rotation of intermediate certificates. As discussed in Appendix B and at the IETF 117 Presentation, this might mean using an extension and dynamic negotiation is more suitable.