Re: [therightkey] Other solutions to the problem

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Thu, 01 November 2012 00:06 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6796321F877F for <therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 17:06:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ES33ISMsA0IC for <therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 17:06:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE12621F870B for <therightkey@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 17:06:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6A17C092; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 00:06:34 +0000 (GMT)
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 yUs8zM3OnC6Z; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 00:06:34 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [10.87.48.4] (unknown [86.44.75.237]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DCD25BE38; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 00:06:33 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <5091BD09.7040605@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 00:06:33 +0000
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121028 Thunderbird/16.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rick Andrews <Rick_Andrews@symantec.com>
References: <7500672F-5BDE-4EBE-ABC3-1AFEF2972D95@vpnc.org> <A09B4DFF-936C-488C-9915-B5F9A579FA1F@vpnc.org> <CABrd9STFeAxxmFDCZMkREXyEcKbeeQbF8ZeESXcoKPnkckdZwQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMm+Lwg6EoSy-p7US0uZtKjxGHF39iH-0mvxg-hJ+AqK4vXL-A@mail.gmail.com> <CABrd9SRa9Ye9gkjpaQ+PqQyay9NKJB__dkDwOBwPHvw16dkTRg@mail.gmail.com> <544B0DD62A64C1448B2DA253C0114146069D3FBAE8@TUS1XCHEVSPIN33.SYMC.SYMANTEC.COM> <CAOuvq22PMSq2sAmUBfJcWu6LhEdCA3jKteu38m4UuHbykp7xZw@mail.gmail.com> <544B0DD62A64C1448B2DA253C0114146069D5FC685@TUS1XCHEVSPIN33.SYMC.SYMANTEC.COM> <6DD8CB4F-1233-403D-A27E-F3F80310390F@vpnc.org> <544B0DD62A64C1448B2DA253C0114146069D5FC79B@TUS1XCHEVSPIN33.SYMC.SYMANTEC.COM> <508A48C5.9070005@comodo.com> <CABrd9SR4y5nRm-AP6t5_HzUO+CROwh+KnVn48_9hMTFQ4A93=Q@mail.gmail.com> <544B0DD62A64C1448B2DA253C0114146069D76E5FC@TUS1XCHEVSPIN33.SYMC.SYMANTEC.COM> <CABrd9STHtw__Wm30Z5T27mx8PMb-mScCSa-EZVDdeQvy_Rru1Q@mail.gmail.com> <544B0DD62A64C1448B2DA253C0114146069F66F830@TUS1XCHEVSPIN33.SYMC.SYMANTEC. COM>
In-Reply-To: <544B0DD62A64C1448B2DA253C0114146069F66F830@TUS1XCHEVSPIN33.SYMC.SYMANTEC.COM>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "therightkey@ietf.org" <therightkey@ietf.org>, Rob Stradling <rob.stradling@comodo.com>, Ben Laurie <benl@google.com>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Subject: Re: [therightkey] Other solutions to the problem
X-BeenThere: therightkey@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <therightkey.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/therightkey>, <mailto:therightkey-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/therightkey>
List-Post: <mailto:therightkey@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:therightkey-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/therightkey>, <mailto:therightkey-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 00:06:58 -0000

Just on this point:

On 10/31/2012 11:57 PM, Rick Andrews wrote:
> Do you have agreements with the major browser vendors to do this? It's possible that not all of them will be on board.

We're discussing a draft submitted for a BoF that might
or might not become a WG or get AD sponsored eventually
producing a proposed standard RFC.

None of that requires guaranteed ubiquitous deployment.
Nothing even near that is required in fact.

The IETF might be justifiably criticised for being slow
in doing stuff, but we ought also note that part of the
reason for that could be the extreme targets we set out
for ourselves.

Cheers,
S.