feat: add cnsa_1 TLS security policies #5364
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Can you add a "why" section to this PR? I don't understand the benefit of another alias. |
|
This PR has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Release Summary
Resolved issues:
Partially addresses #5152
Description of changes:
Added new security policy: cnsa_1, which is an alias for the existing rfc9151 policy defined in RFC 9151.
Why these changes are being made:
Based on Alex Weibel's (POC) email response on why we should add an alias
Testing:
Existing unit tests for rfc9151 implicitly validate cnsa_1 behavior.