IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Spasm] proposed work item

"Jim Schaad" <ietf@augustcellars.com> Wed, 11 May 2016 20:37 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.com>
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 2821F12D824 for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 May 2016 13:37:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.62
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.62 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 lFtfSGV8MBKY for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 May 2016 13:37:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp2.pacifier.net (smtp2.pacifier.net [64.255.237.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99E9412D5F5 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 May 2016 13:37:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hebrews (c-24-21-96-37.hsd1.or.comcast.net [24.21.96.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: schaad@nwlink.com) by smtp2.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C16B92CA22 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 May 2016 13:37:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: spasm@ietf.org
References: <571795E5.6080008@cisco.com> <5733780E.6010209@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <5733780E.6010209@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 13:37:09 -0700
Message-ID: <02a001d1abc4$e4a8c320$adfa4960$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQFMLJsKNpnsQTU0Ff96nrU+G9vdwAGiuYe4oLIarZA=
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/5qGkQckVXclDLrA_6LrDQsqqnG8>
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 20:37:36 -0000

At the moment it seems both harmless and not very interesting.

Jim


-----Original Message-----
From: Spasm [mailto:spasm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Farrell
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 11:21 AM
To: spasm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Spasm] proposed work item


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
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email