Skip to main content
+timeline
Source Link
StackzOfZtuff
  • 18.3k
  • 1
  • 55
  • 86

The IETF has a data tracker for its RFCs.

This means that you can flesh out the development timeline by adding the various drafts for each RFC. And you can narrow down dates to the date of the first published draft.

What this doesn't tell you when development for the first submitted draft of each RFC started.

Also the "SSL" named protocols were not developed through the RFC process.

#Datatrackers

#Partial timeline

  • 1996-12-03, TLS 1.0, first draft (of 6)
  • 1999-01-01, TLS 1.0, RFC published
  • 2002-02-19, TLS 1.1, first draft (of 13)
  • 2006-03-02, TLS 1.2, first draft (of 10)
  • 2006-04-26, TLS 1.1, RFC published
  • 2008-08-15, TLS 1.2, RFC published
  • 2014-04-17, TLS 1.3, first draft

#Further reading

For a much more detailed history of the early years of the SSL protocol, I recommend Eric Rescorla’s book SSL and TLS: Designing and Building Secure Systems (Addison-Wesley, 2001), pages 47–51.

The IETF has a data tracker for its RFCs.

This means that you can flesh out the development timeline by adding the various drafts for each RFC. And you can narrow down dates to the date of the first published draft.

What this doesn't tell you when development for the first submitted draft of each RFC started.

Also the "SSL" named protocols were not developed through the RFC process.

#Datatrackers

#Partial timeline

  • 1996-12-03, TLS 1.0, first draft (of 6)
  • 1999-01-01, TLS 1.0, RFC published
  • 2002-02-19, TLS 1.1, first draft (of 13)
  • 2006-03-02, TLS 1.2, first draft (of 10)
  • 2006-04-26, TLS 1.1, RFC published
  • 2008-08-15, TLS 1.2, RFC published
  • 2014-04-17, TLS 1.3, first draft

#Further reading

For a much more detailed history of the early years of the SSL protocol, I recommend Eric Rescorla’s book SSL and TLS: Designing and Building Secure Systems (Addison-Wesley, 2001), pages 47–51.

The IETF has a data tracker for its RFCs.

This means that you can flesh out the development timeline by adding the various drafts for each RFC. And you can narrow down dates to the date of the first published draft.

What this doesn't tell you when development for the first submitted draft of each RFC started.

Also the "SSL" named protocols were not developed through the RFC process.

#Datatrackers

#Partial timeline

  • 1996-12-03, TLS 1.0, first draft (of 6)
  • 1999-01-01, TLS 1.0, RFC published
  • 2002-02-19, TLS 1.1, first draft (of 13)
  • 2006-03-02, TLS 1.2, first draft (of 10)
  • 2006-04-26, TLS 1.1, RFC published
  • 2008-08-15, TLS 1.2, RFC published
  • 2014-04-17, TLS 1.3, first draft

#Further reading

For a much more detailed history of the early years of the SSL protocol, I recommend Eric Rescorla’s book SSL and TLS: Designing and Building Secure Systems (Addison-Wesley, 2001), pages 47–51.

+ quote
Source Link
StackzOfZtuff
  • 18.3k
  • 1
  • 55
  • 86

The IETF has a data tracker for its RFCs.

This means that you can flesh out the development timeline by adding the various drafts for each RFC. And you can narrow down dates to the date of the first published draft.

What this doesn't tell you when development for the first submitted draft of each RFC started.

Also the "SSL" named protocols were not developed through the RFC process.

#Datatrackers

#Partial timeline

  • 1996-12-03, TLS 1.0, first draft (of 6)
  • 1999-01-01, TLS 1.0, RFC published
  • 2002-02-19, TLS 1.1, first draft (of 13)
  • 2006-03-02, TLS 1.2, first draft (of 10)
  • 2006-04-26, TLS 1.1, RFC published
  • 2008-08-15, TLS 1.2, RFC published
  • 2014-04-17, TLS 1.3, first draft

#Further reading

For a much more detailed history of the early years of the SSL protocol, I recommend Eric Rescorla’s book SSL and TLS: Designing and Building Secure Systems (Addison-Wesley, 2001), pages 47–51.

The IETF has a data tracker for its RFCs.

This means that you can flesh out the development timeline by adding the various drafts for each RFC. And you can narrow down dates to the date of the first published draft.

What this doesn't tell you when development for the first submitted draft of each RFC started.

Also the "SSL" named protocols were not developed through the RFC process.

#Datatrackers

#Partial timeline

  • 1996-12-03, TLS 1.0, first draft (of 6)
  • 1999-01-01, TLS 1.0, RFC published
  • 2002-02-19, TLS 1.1, first draft (of 13)
  • 2006-03-02, TLS 1.2, first draft (of 10)
  • 2006-04-26, TLS 1.1, RFC published
  • 2008-08-15, TLS 1.2, RFC published
  • 2014-04-17, TLS 1.3, first draft

#Further reading

The IETF has a data tracker for its RFCs.

This means that you can flesh out the development timeline by adding the various drafts for each RFC. And you can narrow down dates to the date of the first published draft.

What this doesn't tell you when development for the first submitted draft of each RFC started.

Also the "SSL" named protocols were not developed through the RFC process.

#Datatrackers

#Partial timeline

  • 1996-12-03, TLS 1.0, first draft (of 6)
  • 1999-01-01, TLS 1.0, RFC published
  • 2002-02-19, TLS 1.1, first draft (of 13)
  • 2006-03-02, TLS 1.2, first draft (of 10)
  • 2006-04-26, TLS 1.1, RFC published
  • 2008-08-15, TLS 1.2, RFC published
  • 2014-04-17, TLS 1.3, first draft

#Further reading

For a much more detailed history of the early years of the SSL protocol, I recommend Eric Rescorla’s book SSL and TLS: Designing and Building Secure Systems (Addison-Wesley, 2001), pages 47–51.

+ further reading
Source Link
StackzOfZtuff
  • 18.3k
  • 1
  • 55
  • 86

The IETF has a data tracker for its RFCs.

This means that you can flesh out the development timeline by adding the various drafts for each RFC. And you can narrow down dates to the date of the first published draft.

What this doesn't tell you when development for the first submitted draft of each RFC started.

Also the "SSL" named protocols were not developed through the RFC process.

#Datatrackers

#Partial timeline

  • 1996-12-03, TLS 1.0, first draft (of 6)
  • 1999-01-01, TLS 1.0, RFC published
  • 2002-02-19, TLS 1.1, first draft (of 13)
  • 2006-03-02, TLS 1.2, first draft (of 10)
  • 2006-04-26, TLS 1.1, RFC published
  • 2008-08-15, TLS 1.2, RFC published
  • 2014-04-17, TLS 1.3, first draft

#Further reading

The IETF has a data tracker for its RFCs.

This means that you can flesh out the development timeline by adding the various drafts for each RFC. And you can narrow down dates to the date of the first published draft.

What this doesn't tell you when development for the first submitted draft of each RFC started.

Also the "SSL" named protocols were not developed through the RFC process.

#Datatrackers

#Partial timeline

  • 1996-12-03, TLS 1.0, first draft (of 6)
  • 1999-01-01, TLS 1.0, RFC published
  • 2002-02-19, TLS 1.1, first draft (of 13)
  • 2006-03-02, TLS 1.2, first draft (of 10)
  • 2006-04-26, TLS 1.1, RFC published
  • 2008-08-15, TLS 1.2, RFC published
  • 2014-04-17, TLS 1.3, first draft

The IETF has a data tracker for its RFCs.

This means that you can flesh out the development timeline by adding the various drafts for each RFC. And you can narrow down dates to the date of the first published draft.

What this doesn't tell you when development for the first submitted draft of each RFC started.

Also the "SSL" named protocols were not developed through the RFC process.

#Datatrackers

#Partial timeline

  • 1996-12-03, TLS 1.0, first draft (of 6)
  • 1999-01-01, TLS 1.0, RFC published
  • 2002-02-19, TLS 1.1, first draft (of 13)
  • 2006-03-02, TLS 1.2, first draft (of 10)
  • 2006-04-26, TLS 1.1, RFC published
  • 2008-08-15, TLS 1.2, RFC published
  • 2014-04-17, TLS 1.3, first draft

#Further reading

Source Link
StackzOfZtuff
  • 18.3k
  • 1
  • 55
  • 86
Loading