IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Spasm] proposed work item

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 11 May 2016 18:38 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8624912D735 for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 May 2016 11:38:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.297
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.297 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-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 uiNPBFjfTF4r for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 May 2016 11:38:35 -0700 (PDT)
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 2BDB112D71B for <spasm@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 May 2016 11:38:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED9DEBE33; Wed, 11 May 2016 19:38:30 +0100 (IST)
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 uXGnRr4O6zJ6; Wed, 11 May 2016 19:38:29 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [172.20.10.8] (unknown [172.56.3.38]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8B6A3BE2D; Wed, 11 May 2016 19:38:28 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1462991909; bh=nkvV6ABxUE7TerYyo76M0qctkCaw2Yc8+CXa7+msEd8=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=YGiaxNaypcjdnQLqV5pUg6lwPzL2YD0f6/HnBJAf1jLIibIApGkf8k0IwXXhwL4cF YqFvJjajSq8jVcNobH0qEi1va1qfSWfVgbYL8ts5/y3yYTYFirJ58IwZC6MVZDbFtM lbpKAt8iS7UGiM5ReEJw6OFcbylDGAiDoeaw7tS8=
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, spasm@ietf.org
References: <571795E5.6080008@cisco.com> <5733780E.6010209@cs.tcd.ie> <57337BA5.8050801@cisco.com>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <57337C22.70307@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 19:38:26 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <57337BA5.8050801@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="T9FRufwrjm9BbeObj0Lujg9A8scmO2wXq"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/3xAkyqe6rM09zMgQXLIBrO_XQn8>
Subject: Re: [Spasm] proposed work item
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is a venue for discussion of doing Some Pkix And SMime \(spasm\) work." <spasm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spasm/>
List-Post: <mailto:spasm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 18:38:41 -0000


On 11/05/16 19:36, Eliot Lear wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> I'm withdrawing the suggestion.  I'll be consolidating the drafts a bit
> and expect the work to continue elsewhere.

Fair enough and thanks, that probably makes sense.
S.

> 
> Eliot
> 
> On 5/11/16 8:21 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On 20/04/16 15:44, Eliot Lear wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> At least for the moment, I'd like to propose a work item that was listed
>>> in Stephen's original note, I believe, which is
>>> draft-lear-ietf-pkix-mud-extension.  I say, “at least for the moment”
>>> because we may want to consolidate MUD work elsewhere later.  I think
>>> the ADs will want to talk about that at some point.
>> Does anyone else support pursuing the relevant part of MUD in the
>> proposed spasm wg?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> S.
>>
>>> Eliot
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Spasm mailing list
>>> Spasm@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Spasm mailing list
>> Spasm@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email