Re: [websec] closing open issue tickets ?
Tobias Gondrom <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org> Tue, 03 July 2012 20:02 UTC
Return-Path: <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org>
X-Original-To: websec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: websec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70D7B21F86DA for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jul 2012 13:02:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -99.24
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.24 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.463, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_DE=1.448, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bdIG3JBoABMm for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jul 2012 13:02:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lvps83-169-7-107.dedicated.hosteurope.de (www.gondrom.org [83.169.7.107]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 590DB21F854E for <websec@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Jul 2012 13:02:06 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=gondrom.org; b=AttmC1AwEuTKybk1qnNwNayhz2Ar9LdowLCQt3ak+WbrjUPSKUThE+1WC/WIMH+8GXFnWtQ+u/H/Hjl0Lb1xhv58/2Sq2RPkZipAXKax2S0SprRJNhH2KF7kgaRlojz6; h=Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type;
Received: (qmail 5755 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2012 22:02:12 +0200
Received: from 94-194-102-93.zone8.bethere.co.uk (HELO ?192.168.1.71?) (94.194.102.93) by www.gondrom.org with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 3 Jul 2012 22:02:12 +0200
Message-ID: <4FF34FC3.70301@gondrom.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2012 21:02:11 +0100
From: Tobias Gondrom <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120615 Thunderbird/13.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com
References: <4FF34C89.50004@KingsMountain.com> <4FF34D01.7030708@stpeter.im>
In-Reply-To: <4FF34D01.7030708@stpeter.im>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060500050900070507080807"
Cc: websec@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [websec] closing open issue tickets ?
X-BeenThere: websec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Web Application Security Minus Authentication and Transport <websec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/websec>, <mailto:websec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/websec>
List-Post: <mailto:websec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:websec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec>, <mailto:websec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2012 20:02:09 -0000
On 03/07/12 20:50, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 7/3/12 1:48 PM, =JeffH wrote: >> I believe draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-sec-10 cumulatively >> addresses the remaining open issue tickets: 41, 42, 47, 48, 49. >> >> #41 and #42 have been discussed on-list. >> >> #47, 48, 49 were privately-conveyed minor issues that -10 cleanly >> addresses. >> >> >> shall I close these open tickets? > Having reviewed -10 (including checking it against the tickets), I would > say yes. > > Peter > <hat="chair"> I would agree, provided there are no objections from the WG. Aka: if anyone does have objections, please do speak up now,. ;-) Tobias
- [websec] closing open issue tickets ? =JeffH
- Re: [websec] closing open issue tickets ? Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [websec] closing open issue tickets ? Tobias Gondrom