IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lamps] Proposed charter update regarding clarifications

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Wed, 11 September 2019 19:17 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.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 7538E120865 for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 12:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 880jua8898Kg for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 12:17:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B551C120800 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 12:17:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BAFC300AED for <spasm@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:17:29 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net
Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 3fsQerTnOVE3 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:17:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [5.5.33.11] (unknown [204.194.23.17]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 22DA1300AEC for <spasm@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:17:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:17:28 -0400
References: <3DB1B550-26FA-4F93-8CFA-434C1F8811D1@vigilsec.com>
To: LAMPS WG <spasm@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <3DB1B550-26FA-4F93-8CFA-434C1F8811D1@vigilsec.com>
Message-Id: <F40D7FDE-207C-4CE0-8DFA-AAC1015CAA7A@vigilsec.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/NLQAnf3O0Hdt0JyhdX9nQBd8jkM>
Subject: Re: [lamps] Proposed charter update regarding clarifications
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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 Sep 2019 19:17:32 -0000

I am concerned that we have heard from very few people on this topic, with roughly equal numbers speaking for, against, and indifferent.  If you have not spoken, please do so.

Russ

> On Jul 27, 2019, at 7:40 AM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
> 
> At the meeting in Montreal, we suggested a charter update to allow clarifications.  I suggest:
> 
> OLD:
> 
> In addition, the LAMPS WG may investigate other updates to documents
> produced by the PKIX and S/MIME WGs, but the LAMPS WG shall not adopt
> any of these potential work items without rechartering.
> 
> NEW:
> 
> In addition, the LAMPS WG may investigate other updates to documents
> produced by the PKIX and S/MIME WG. The LAMPS WG may produce
> clarifications where needed, but the LAMPS WG shall not adopt
> anything beyond clarifications without rechartering.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Russ

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email