Re: [pkix] RFC 5742 review of draft-hotz-kx509 and about RFC 4211
Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> Mon, 04 June 2012 19:34 UTC
Return-Path: <kent@bbn.com>
X-Original-To: pkix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pkix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0B8C11E80E8 for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jun 2012 12:34:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.338
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.338 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.260, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 l7OHA23g4npi for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jun 2012 12:34:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.bbn.com (smtp.bbn.com [128.33.1.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 042B611E80CD for <pkix@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Jun 2012 12:34:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp89-089-114.bbn.com ([128.89.89.114]:49157) by smtp.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <kent@bbn.com>) id 1Sbd25-000IHh-UL; Mon, 04 Jun 2012 15:33:42 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06240801cbf2b799cc92@[128.89.89.114]>
In-Reply-To: <OFEBA66BA3.DC95987A-ONC1257A10.00278E13-C1257A10.0028AC03@bull.net>
References: <4FC6AEDA.4010709@cs.tcd.ie> <OF2C174BF8.9661F84B-ONC1257A0F.0035B9F3-C1257A0F.0059FC5B@bull.net> <8762bbaa15.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> <OFEBA66BA3.DC95987A-ONC1257A10.00278E13-C1257A10.0028AC03@bull.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 15:06:36 -0400
To: denis.pinkas@bull.net
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-873284041==_ma============"
Cc: pkix <pkix@ietf.org>, Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>, Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
Subject: Re: [pkix] RFC 5742 review of draft-hotz-kx509 and about RFC 4211
X-BeenThere: pkix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: PKIX Working Group <pkix.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pkix>, <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pkix>
List-Post: <mailto:pkix@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix>, <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 19:34:25 -0000
At 9:24 AM +0200 6/1/12, denis.pinkas@bull.net wrote: >First of all, thank you for both of you for your fast response. > >I am not arguing there is an RFC 5742 conflict with this document. > >Since you said that is an attempt to document an existing deployed >protocol, we cannot change it. > >Since you said that designing a better protocol is an expected >follow-on work, I raise the question to both the editors and the WG >chairs >whether the document should be on the experimental track rather than >on the informational track. Necause this is documenting an extant protocol, informational seems more appropriate than experimental. Steve
- [pkix] RFC 5742 review of draft-hotz-kx509 Stephen Farrell
- Re: [pkix] RFC 5742 review of draft-hotz-kx509 an… denis.pinkas
- Re: [pkix] RFC 5742 review of draft-hotz-kx509 an… Russ Allbery
- Re: [pkix] RFC 5742 review of draft-hotz-kx509 an… denis.pinkas
- Re: [pkix] RFC 5742 review of draft-hotz-kx509 an… Henry B. Hotz
- Re: [pkix] [Ietf-krb-wg] RFC 5742 review of draft… Sam Hartman
- Re: [pkix] RFC 5742 review of draft-hotz-kx509 an… Stephen Kent
- [pkix] Fwd: RFC 5742 review of draft-hotz-kx509 Stephen Farrell