IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [eppext] New draft for keyrelay available

Miek Gieben <miek@miek.nl> Mon, 19 January 2015 09:47 UTC

Return-Path: <miek@miek.nl>
X-Original-To: eppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: eppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8260D1AD377 for <eppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 01:47:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vd6cNNxtZOi9 for <eppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 01:47:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com (mail-wi0-f177.google.com [209.85.212.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2C081AD35B for <eppext@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 01:47:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f177.google.com with SMTP id r20so7343564wiv.4 for <eppext@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 01:47:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=T04xUaBN0v7Q2j7FhAOXgVVc1tjf7L04X+vzfCgUmQA=; b=Hdn3qgrKNc4qrTW3VgM2m2ow7jB6PS8tQYNEpV7V819xFP6D3fbr2dLVv2p94qzgrj QnmfGaC62g/EdliFrc81Lwjp5nzr+caGq8Cd6wMixe8wmRyKf0BYbk9xcTOPzbZtnlDs 8dDurkz7/t8cX1puW2rjIZ8YkVaK0+nxp4igpDKELLjysfBaY6XyYTNW3SU92l/GBBGa GsST3psOtVMgrSP6H8aigkH+1mXXGlu2+0oXRMUi6RFK0KxM0AdVAO0sP/ILX3r1XrOa 5lxkztZ2UrApmO/z0Sztht+RZFTy8Mzs0O3hHCdQVU/elz4v+MDRiLaAh1rlyPvSdldV UnLg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkIBxq50PQuQ616ZY/qIeu88TyXe5+qxrg4R5/e/ZDKT1tjx6yLTGAaYKl49QzIqv6HUWH8
X-Received: by 10.194.78.229 with SMTP id e5mr6139142wjx.11.1421660856304; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 01:47:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miek.nl ([2a01:7e00::f03c:91ff:feae:e74c]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id td6sm13511294wic.15.2015.01.19.01.47.35 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 19 Jan 2015 01:47:35 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 09:47:34 +0000
From: Miek Gieben <miek@miek.nl>
To: "Gould, James" <JGould@verisign.com>
Message-ID: <20150119094734.GA27180@miek.nl>
Mail-Followup-To: "Gould, James" <JGould@verisign.com>, Rik Ribbers <rik.ribbers@sidn.nl>, "eppext@ietf.org" <eppext@ietf.org>
References: <C80127C588F8F2409E2B535AF968B768B927CDA8@kambx2.SIDN.local> <0ED7237B-F4E8-45D7-971F-1625350DB0FC@verisign.com> <C80127C588F8F2409E2B535AF968B768B9280B52@kambx2.SIDN.local> <472EF001-1A03-4C50-A7DB-3D6B766B3BA8@verisign.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <472EF001-1A03-4C50-A7DB-3D6B766B3BA8@verisign.com>
User-Agent: Vim/Mutt/Linux
X-Home: http://www.miek.nl
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/eppext/hZN6eRCAO-xSamUX2DaY7h9mlXM>
Cc: Rik Ribbers <rik.ribbers@sidn.nl>, "eppext@ietf.org" <eppext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [eppext] New draft for keyrelay available
X-BeenThere: eppext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: EPPEXT <eppext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/eppext>, <mailto:eppext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/eppext/>
List-Post: <mailto:eppext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:eppext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eppext>, <mailto:eppext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 09:47:39 -0000

[ Quoting <JGould@verisign.com> in "Re: [eppext] New draft for keyrelay..." ]
>All,
>
>I agree with Rik that more from the WG must weigh in on this.  I believe Rik
>and I understood fully each others perspective, but we simply don’t agree.
>Please take some time to review the two different approaches and reply to the
>list with your opinion.

I didn't see any replies, so I'm assuming not that many people care about this
issue.

As one of the draft authors I think we should leave the draft in its current
state.

/Miek

--
Miek Gieben

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email