[TLS] On editorial discretion

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Tue, 10 June 2014 23:56 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 424241A0264 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:56:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 3ieNy1iTlpx6 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:56:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x231.google.com (mail-wi0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C84381A00FD for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:56:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f177.google.com with SMTP id f8so146342wiw.10 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=Tps0Nvh6TVp5TuK4yFVfaSFSHDyh3O+3YYHrbQF4298=; b=ZJJkRYkOc5BDgCFIj+dPyTYHBcOAAoMk3x/sYxqUBD3lCEMUVKgg4HwqfOZPkwOt7S tXPMW8SXuAHmJnTR2L3WgzapA7r+aq0r8dHQFgFcBdK15GBvzUcqzuCgFMXpyzmligUT PS6vx7fsw8biDOYTded6K99RsN/AhvKFh1ERW/ztLw4TDk4ku+Xu4y3nAbPh+mzAVs9S XTJY+evijThq5W4vwcoqEq4wkiYeOEuBxV7kLiMLHjWW4jUnkTUNR1AJ58DLAfdEMrCf u6i2KZFgcrPDVDMu++vkAQiQaV1+L1DEgRVWyvSpK4lYyZ80dCCxjw/UU+1jevT7Y16F /BmA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.7.36 with SMTP id g4mr46185718wja.37.1402444567202; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.51.134 with HTTP; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:56:07 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnV4gHwFT6+eS07xiw4NNxVz8Z04JLF9UMX8+svd1Fe23A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/7ky-U2mKLO3jWclS_GAu1NafzDs
Subject: [TLS] On editorial discretion
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 23:56:10 -0000

The talk about the various merits and drawbacks of state machines vs.
ladder diagrams is distracting.  Might I recommend that we leave this
to editorial discretion?  I'm sure that our editor won't mind
receiving input in the form of proposals, if anyone cares enough to
generate them.