Re: [TLS] Confirming consensus about one draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation

From: Martin Rex <mrex at sap.com>
To: tls at ietf.org
Cc: ietf at ietf.org
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:20:17 +0100 (MET)
In-reply-to: <808FD6E27AD4884E94820BC333B2DB775841199A56 at NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com> from "Pasi.Eronen at nokia.com" at Jan 26, 10 09:49:06 am

 
    (2) I prefer *NOT* publishing the specification as-is, and instead
    prefer to remove the 4 accidentally added rfc-2119-incompliant
    imperatives from -03 back to the technically sensible semantics
    which had the original WG and IETF consensus.  The document editor
    has proposed fixed text to make this an editoral change from -02,
    so this change is not going to hold up the document.

-Martin

References:
- Confirming consensus about one draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation detail
  - From: Pasi.Eronen

Prev by Date: Re: [TLS] Confirming consensus about one draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation detail
Next by Date: Weekly posting summary for ietf at ietf.org
Previous by thread: Re: [TLS] Confirming consensus about one draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation detail
Next by thread: RE: [TLS] Confirming consensus about one draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation detail
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: [TLS] Confirming consensus about one draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.