Re: [ietf-outcomes] A question of style

Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net> Sat, 06 February 2010 23:01 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: ietf-outcomes@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-outcomes@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 513883A67ED for <ietf-outcomes@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Feb 2010 15:01:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.572
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.572 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.027, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b2r3k06Ud-Jl for <ietf-outcomes@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Feb 2010 15:01:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 544453A67FE for <ietf-outcomes@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Feb 2010 15:01:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.43] (adsl-68-122-70-87.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [68.122.70.87]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o16N2Fnt013388 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 6 Feb 2010 15:02:20 -0800
Message-ID: <4B6DF4F0.7050607@dcrocker.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2010 15:02:08 -0800
From: Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mel Beckman <mel@beckman.org>
References: <DE01B0C2-2C15-4D48-A8ED-9F7A9EF593EF@beckman.org>
In-Reply-To: <DE01B0C2-2C15-4D48-A8ED-9F7A9EF593EF@beckman.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92/10362/Fri Feb 5 23:14:06 2010 on sbh17.songbird.com
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Sat, 06 Feb 2010 15:02:21 -0800 (PST)
Cc: "ietf-outcomes@ietf.org" <ietf-outcomes@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ietf-outcomes] A question of style
X-BeenThere: ietf-outcomes@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: IETF Outcomes Wiki discussion list <ietf-outcomes.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-outcomes>, <mailto:ietf-outcomes-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-outcomes>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-outcomes@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-outcomes-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-outcomes>, <mailto:ietf-outcomes-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2010 23:01:27 -0000

On 2/6/2010 2:44 PM, Mel Beckman wrote:
> I posted the "Only SSH-2 adopted by IETF" comment to users that the
> IETF-adopted standard for SSH isnt' backward-compatible with SSH-1. No
> marketing was intended. I'll use phrasing suggested by dhc, which is
> more clear: "SSH2 is incompatible with pre-standardized SSH1".


Mel,

Thanks for the effort on the wiki and thanks for following up with me.

I apologize for removing the text before asking.  I reacted too quickly.  It's 
easy to add it back, but I wanted to wait for some feedback from the list in 
response to my query about it.  Your clarification certainly sounds reasonable.

I, for one, like your alternate wording.

Thanks!

d/


-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net