Re: [openpgp] Magnus Westerlund's No Objection on charter-ietf-openpgp-02-03: (with COMMENT)
Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Thu, 17 December 2020 13:02 UTC
Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F3023A0637; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 05:02:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 n9sPFaceUEmx; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 05:02:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFA0A3A061B; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 05:02:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47036BE4D; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 13:02:31 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T4wT9WiV7beW; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 13:02:29 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [10.244.2.119] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D2B2BE2C; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 13:02:29 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1608210149; bh=Q6kGRzleY/TtwXdrNGFO979fYIDWFSqGbHFlEElhxi0=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=DwfqjigIW23mAJEn+3F4laVbShumydKn05UdcxTZc7s4d20r8rcQEWts/8Xw571I5 ARtCGeGuRXQmnGS7XFBZsgD7i6crQ7xMCBn9a4JGOcrBm280G0amQSU8dzZJLegp4R OCPAJVp59suC6MrEyHBD39T6PLc/aUZfGVuRSxy0=
To: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: openpgp@ietf.org, openpgp-chairs@ietf.org
References: <160820923564.10490.10205450585186601631@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Message-ID: <d793d811-1a54-bcea-9e87-4795c44d799b@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 13:02:28 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <160820923564.10490.10205450585186601631@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="VSjVrvLfDp8uKV2aG9nbNVOwnLPFVtTcP"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/Dmw5_y4BZ79MDgMw4CjpsPBk0R0>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Magnus Westerlund's No Objection on charter-ietf-openpgp-02-03: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <openpgp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/openpgp/>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 13:02:36 -0000
Hi Magnus, On 17/12/2020 12:47, Magnus Westerlund via Datatracker wrote: > What is the definition of un-interested party? By reviewing are they > not sufficiently interested to be an "interested party"? There are various groups of people that are more or less loosely or tightly associated with specific implementations so we wanted to make it clear that such a group piling on for a thing they really like (perhaps for good reason) isn't sufficient for adoption. I don't think it'd be useful to try define that more precisely as we'd get it wrong and maybe just irritate people, so best I can see it'll have to depend on WG chair judgement as to which reviews count that way or not. Cheers, S.
- [openpgp] Magnus Westerlund's No Objection on cha… Magnus Westerlund via Datatracker
- Re: [openpgp] Magnus Westerlund's No Objection on… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [openpgp] Magnus Westerlund's No Objection on… Magnus Westerlund