Subject: Re: [sidr] adopting alternate trust format in draft-ietf-sidr-ta-04

From: Christopher Morrow <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:02:41 -0400

It seems that the alt-doc has some revising to be done though adoption
by the WG seems like the right path here. Some author-author
discussion is being done, with some doc updates. I think the WG wants
this to be at LC in/before Bejing. We have a month to do that work.

Unless there are complaints about this, please get a last rev in
before Bejing so it can start LC just before the meeting.

-Chris
(wg co-chair shoes on)

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Warren Kumari <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 25, 2010, at 4:18 AM, Sandra Murphy wrote:
>
>> Draft draft-weiler-sidr-trust-anchor-format-00.txt suggests an alternate
>> trust anchor representation format from that proposed in
>> draft-ietf-sidr-ta-04.  This alternate format was discussed in the sidr
>> meeting in IETF78 in Maastricht.
>>
>> I am asking for comment on the list as to whether there is wg consensus
>> that draft-ietf-sidr-ta-04 should use the alternative format.
>
> Yup.
>
>>
>> Please respond so that the authors can represent wg consensus in the
>> draft.  The call for consensus will end Sept 8.
>>
>> --Sandy
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sidr mailing list
>> [email-masked]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
>
> --
> Never criticize a man till you've walked a mile in his shoes.  Then if he
> didn't like what you've said, he's a mile away and barefoot.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sidr mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
>