Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-smime-cms-mult-sign (CryptographicMessageSyntax(CMS) MultipleSigner Clarification) to Proposed Standard

[Sam Hartman <hartmans at mit.edu>]

>>>>> "Blake" == Blake Ramsdell <blake at sendmail.com> writes:

    Blake> OK, let me back up and explain the events as I see them and
    Blake> try to clarify. And I am certainly welcome to any comments
    Blake> or criticism about what my role is or how I should proceed
    Blake> with this.

    Blake> * My job as WG chair is to make sure that the editor (Russ)
    Blake> has created a draft that incorporates what we consider to
    Blake> be the rough consensus of the working group.

    Blake> * You had some comments on this draft. Some of your
    Blake> comments were incorporated. Some of your comments had zero
    Blake> support from the WG members on the working group mailing
    Blake> list. Clarifications welcome as to exactly who else
    Blake> supported these comments.

You also have a job to make sure WG last call comments are responded
to and that technical issuse are addressed.

For the issues Denis raised, I'm also probably going to require
something stronger than "No one agreed."  I'd like to know why he's
wrong.


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf