IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Conclusion of the last call on draft-housley-two-maturity-levels

Eric Burger <eburger-l@standardstrack.com> Sun, 11 September 2011 01:23 UTC

Return-Path: <eburger-l@standardstrack.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACF3621F8A7D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 10 Sep 2011 18:23:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hZ5G-Z-hwM1w for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 10 Sep 2011 18:23:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from biz104.inmotionhosting.com (biz104.inmotionhosting.com [74.124.194.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 186E921F84C5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Sep 2011 18:23:57 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=standardstrack.com; h=Received:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:X-Mailer:X-Source:X-Source-Args:X-Source-Dir; b=gT4+OPkZPdsAdgGAZzmmQiLhJt8dbMV5lvE8imTloNi/bJlJtkabhN3kMTnB+jtzOlaiI3eD9ond6L7vm646LXVFnnh9OS6gimaFeMop2Gkqj4/Lr8ueBM8jrLQ20hUZ;
Received: from ip68-100-199-8.dc.dc.cox.net ([68.100.199.8] helo=[192.168.15.141]) by biz104.inmotionhosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <eburger-l@standardstrack.com>) id 1R2Yny-0002yC-0G; Sat, 10 Sep 2011 18:25:54 -0700
Subject: Re: Conclusion of the last call on draft-housley-two-maturity-levels
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Eric Burger <eburger-l@standardstrack.com>
In-Reply-To: <201109100133.p8A1XFvS003894@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 21:26:02 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <3E9E22D3-9C4B-48CF-A0F1-BACD219AF582@standardstrack.com>
References: <20110728121904.2D22AD7A76F@newdev.eecs.harvard.edu> <4E5D4570.9080108@piuha.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20110902090159.09e97af0@resistor.net> <4E6147D4.2020204@santronics.com> <DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C352657343@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <20110906161108.GI31240@shinkuro.com> <CEDD8840-BE2D-405E-872A-271C25A9A59D@network-heretics.com> <01O5QFMUPV8S014O5Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <96633252-503F-4DCD-B6FD-B6B9DEA1FC66@network-heretics.com> <01O5RIOBEGP0014O5Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <201109100133.p8A1XFvS003894@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - biz104.inmotionhosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - standardstrack.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Cc: IETF list discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 01:23:57 -0000

So should we move to a one-step process?

On Sep 9, 2011, at 9:33 PM, Thomas Narten wrote:

> Advancing a spec is done for marketing, political, process and other
> reasons. E.g., to give a spec more legitimacy. Or to more clear
> replace an older one. Nothing wrong with that.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email