Subject: dnsext/pkix clash looks unfortunate

From: George Michaelson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 05:16:42 +0100

dnsext mainly now talks crypto. seems a shape to schedule this  
alongside the pkix wg and require crypto people to split in to two  
(presumably symmetric) halves..

and the magic trio of dnsext, pkix and v6ops also looks unfortunate.

-G

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:10:30 -0700

At 5:16 AM +0100 10/7/09, George Michaelson wrote:
>dnsext mainly now talks crypto. seems a shape to schedule this alongside the pkix wg and require crypto people to split in to two (presumably symmetric) halves..

As one of those split people, I disagree that DNSEXT "mainly now talks crypto". I believe that the crypto-related presentations for Hiroshima are expected to be very short overviews, and that the meat will be on non-crypto issues like TCP fallback. It also seems that less and less of the PKIX work is crypto and more is policy.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

---

From: George Michaelson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:01:56 +0200

I withdraw my comment. Its a fine time, there is no contextual clash,  
the chairs like it, leave it alone

-G

On 07/10/2009, at 5:10 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:

> As one of those split people, I disagree that DNSEXT "mainly now  
> talks crypto". I believe that the crypto-related presentations for  
> Hiroshima are expected to be very short overviews, and that the meat  
> will be on non-crypto issues like TCP fallback. It also seems that  
> less and less of the PKIX work is crypto and more is policy.
>
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --VPN Consortium