[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: editorial on Photuris
Charles,
Thanks for your note.
There is no process problem with the IETF referencing PGP certificates.
The IETF is not restricted to only referencing IETF specs.
While I agree that it would be nice to also support other kinds
of certificates eventually, I think there is rough (not necessarily
smooth) consensus in the WG that PGP is important to support now.
As a point of fact, PGP is already widely deployed and used in the
Internet community. Rough consensus is the benchmark that the
IETF specifies and that the chairs try to apply.
If you have specific changes you want to see in any of the specs
being discussed (SKIP, Photuris, etc), then it would be helpful if
you made specific proposals to the entire mailing list. I _do_
generally sympathise with document editors when general comments
are made that are not obvious to write up for the document. As
editor for AH/ESP, I can say that folks who sent me proposed revised
text almost always succeeded in getting me to change my text...
Ran
rja@cs.nrl.navy.mil
Follow-Ups: