Greetings,
Thank's Derek - you saved me the response. That's exactly the intent.
It gives the chairs some latitude to accept some of the other work so
long as it doesn't impinge on the 4880bis activity.
Christopher
On 9 Jun 2015, at 6:26, Derek Atkins wrote:
Hi,
"Alissa Cooper" <alissa(_at_)cooperw(_dot_)in> writes:
[snip]
It would be better IMO to characterize what this "other work" might
entail or relate to. It may be obvious to the proponents but for
someone
who has not been following this it sounds like the WG could take up
pretty much anything beyond the 4880bis, time and interest
permitting.
While I can neither speak for the chairs or the ADs, my feeling is
that
there are a handful of topics that have been proposed on the OpenPGP
mailing list that are not necessarily directly related to RFC4880bis
but
have had some support to progress. My feeling is that this "open
ended"
notion was to allow the chairs to accept some (or all) of thosed
proposed work items (that have already started) without an explicit
rechartering effort. But the wording is there to make sure the WG
focuses on RFC4880bis first.
-derek
--
Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
derek(_at_)ihtfp(_dot_)com www.ihtfp.com
Computer and Internet Security Consultant
_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list
openpgp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp
--
李柯睿
Avt tace, avt loqvere meliora silentio
Check my PGP key here: http://www.asgaard.org/cdl/cdl.asc
Current vCard here: http://www.asgaard.org/cdl/cdl.vcf
keybase: https://keybase.io/liljenstolpe
_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list
openpgp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp