Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted

Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@nomountain.net> Sat, 10 March 2018 05:41 UTC

Return-Path: <melinda.shore@nomountain.net>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32CA112D873 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Mar 2018 21:41:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nomountain-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 b7VVeNm0qnrS for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Mar 2018 21:41:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg0-x231.google.com (mail-pg0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1C4C1200F1 for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Mar 2018 21:41:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg0-x231.google.com with SMTP id e9so4384340pgs.10 for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 09 Mar 2018 21:41:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nomountain-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to; bh=LKcq0DrHOFamHiNzvtz23ebanpdbRfqtG58osLXYgm0=; b=XVYdl9R7QMyXHcjgftt5eeJdK1HnofqIHA+R8JZL9iKs0kmdkem90q/1MY+YuqKfWh mAcNon255O8mHxYaAO65lTnU7sqco815vEvKTPydRcdtzeyH9YFslSZr/As9QTHLcNVW jNnQRUrbZBb0d3+Ec53M9TCMMevhHqhyVLfEgXOCkA0wEdDAUp8xJPfWN7OQtTEE6/hW YLoZW2XV+tCWzpT68J9jnfY+IXSV3cyFSN41lGfsYSDNxAKlQtE+lkuWylUBew6VXWms qWM16D5Z5ViUPwrNWE7vdG3vxKymgcpCTXP7Q0UBA7+wJliEZRHwBiO/XVQQxqccCGHF NUfA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=LKcq0DrHOFamHiNzvtz23ebanpdbRfqtG58osLXYgm0=; b=Fpukk2BFudQZ1SMcxmHflQoontsjCBnOK1BpUZzB20u3N05PrARngWLTJYpNGfN4ko iaXk+im04hTtQY4t2Yhzqxiq9INIKGLe4z9w6Uxtm+4FwBmKvkwIEG6GUksyydjxojAe pzxPnBBayIeqhwoSBcvT+i1oSwjKCT+EK2bNiNrVaNEmqgVXZi1xH2j9d/8F0iVYEAba DJM0sI/nd8PKSgv5qSEYXcLbL7XcA7v5ui4bvjUmb67FUTpjSA3P/y6LU350ezMZ35bc JV07mdmDz53krw8v/iUjEYbfIVDrV5gKXyBUBllJGabgF6N+WC2aXHoSdKMgUo5xszSF dmMQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7GNFYjQS4WXdZkHVQlYRMLWNVU9vfqvY6+pP75lr0AzV4BjPinA ZnwtHi/0uSyON4XFwC3H7HWvtaE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELvE1S3jrpUvHE/9FXLWZECivtFzbTt5WGj+ade9NJF6zXRVuibV/Bh//E5Ncwt3b3npJlBHzg==
X-Received: by 10.99.0.19 with SMTP id 19mr871008pga.25.1520660516124; Fri, 09 Mar 2018 21:41:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aspen.local (209-112-197-161-radius.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [209.112.197.161]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h80sm5945448pfj.181.2018.03.09.21.41.55 for <tls@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 09 Mar 2018 21:41:55 -0800 (PST)
To: tls@ietf.org
References: <6140B7A6-A1C7-44BC-9C65-9BE0D5E1B580@sn3rd.com> <986797a7-81b0-7874-5f39-afe83c86635b@cs.tcd.ie> <CAOgPGoBYc7O+qmjM-ptkRkE6mRsOYgc5O7Wu9pm3drFp3TVa6Q@mail.gmail.com> <d7dfdc1a-2c96-fd88-df1b-3167fe0f804b@cs.tcd.ie> <CAHbuEH7E8MhFcMt2GSngSrGxN=6bU6LD49foPC-mdoUZboH_0Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@nomountain.net>
Message-ID: <1a024320-c674-6f75-ccc4-d27b75e3d017@nomountain.net>
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 20:41:53 -0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAHbuEH7E8MhFcMt2GSngSrGxN=6bU6LD49foPC-mdoUZboH_0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1WmEpzPA40DIeMMBd0wR1FsdJY9giy7Vb"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/9SEebIdx0Su46Xv5FsipV64C2Xw>
Subject: Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sat, 10 Mar 2018 05:41:58 -0000

On 3/9/18 12:57 PM, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
> The hummed answer to that question was very close to 50/50 in the
> room, inconclusive.

From the perspective of consensus decision-making that's
actually very clear - there's no consensus.  What that
means in practice depends on the question that was asked,
but at any rate I think what matters here is a lack of
consensus.

Also, there's been basically no discussion of the draft
on the mailing list, and I'm not sure why.

Melinda

-- 
Software longa, hardware brevis

PGP fingerprint: 4F68 2D93 2A17 96F8 20F2
                 34C0 DFB8 9172 9A76 DB8F