Re: [Isms] wg last call followup - sshtm

[Wes Hardaker <wjhns1 at hardakers.net>]

>>>>> On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:28:02 -0500, "David Harrington" <ietfdbh at comcast.net> said:

DH> I think there is significant work in modifying the document.

I don't think so, assuming you're talking about the SSH document.  In
order to make the changes I made and posted yesterday (and again today)
I reviewed every place that securityName was mentioned in the SSH
document.  There isn't a huge number of references to it and the ones I
found were quickly modified.

It sounds like there is "some" consensus that the TMSM document doesn't
need references to the user@ syntax since it's SSH specific.

If the TSM document contains an @ reference, I'd suggest we remove it.
It's SSH specific.
-- 
Wes Hardaker
Sparta, Inc.