IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lamps] Proposed charter update regarding clarifications

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Thu, 03 October 2019 20:09 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 D0D99120821 for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 13:09:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 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] 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 Tf67OhaLFycj for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 13:09:37 -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 1C51D1208A3 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 13:09:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97FB6300AEA for <spasm@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 16:09:35 -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 R0OzpqBvgRcL for <spasm@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 16:09:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from a860b60074bd.fios-router.home (unknown [138.88.156.37]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7D0C7300460 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 16:09:34 -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: Thu, 03 Oct 2019 16:09:35 -0400
References: <3DB1B550-26FA-4F93-8CFA-434C1F8811D1@vigilsec.com> <F40D7FDE-207C-4CE0-8DFA-AAC1015CAA7A@vigilsec.com>
To: LAMPS WG <spasm@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <F40D7FDE-207C-4CE0-8DFA-AAC1015CAA7A@vigilsec.com>
Message-Id: <1FCD3A67-9834-4D0B-8B19-2C3EADA498E5@vigilsec.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/nbSHrZc1shnfJZlgM_LMb0kbITA>
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: Thu, 03 Oct 2019 20:09:47 -0000

I am pleased that several more people have spoken up.  In addition, some people that appeared indifferent are now be counted as supportive.  I believe that there is consensus to propose the NEW text as part of the next recharter.

Russ


On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 3:17 PM Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
> 
> 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