IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-housley-two-maturity-levels

Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com> Wed, 27 October 2010 07:20 UTC

Return-Path: <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B79FC3A69B7 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Oct 2010 00:20:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.507, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 cu3TSvsDuSP3 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Oct 2010 00:20:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mgw-sa01.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.1.47]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC8E53A6992 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Oct 2010 00:20:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.fit.nokia.com (esdhcp030222.research.nokia.com [172.21.30.222]) by mgw-sa01.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o9R7MF8Q001465 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:22:15 +0300
Subject: Re: draft-housley-two-maturity-levels
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.3 at fit.nokia.com
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail-49-619282511"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
From: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <20101026231042.GR82074@verdi>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:22:07 +0300
Message-Id: <02D665AA-6439-4427-AD31-245DBA4D86A8@nokia.com>
References: <20101026115954.13D815B23A6@newdev.eecs.harvard.edu> <03b201cb754f$f1b1f930$d515eb90$@net> <20101026231042.GR82074@verdi>
To: John Leslie <john@jlc.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.6 (mail.fit.nokia.com); Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:22:07 +0300 (EEST)
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 07:20:32 -0000

On 2010-10-27, at 2:10, John Leslie wrote:
>   I'm quite certain the IESG doesn't have such a blanket policy.

Correct (of course).

>   The reported incident _may_ be accurate, but such a requirement
> would have come from the WG Chair, not the responsible AD, least of
> all some other AD. I'd be very surprised if this incident turns out
> to be anything more than a WGC (who may _also_ be an AD) requiring
> implementation reports for a single I-D proposed for adoption.

In this case, James was the author *and* is the WG chair. This is why I got involved as AD.

Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email