ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Withdrawal of Approval and Second Last Call: draft-housley-tls-authz-extns

2007-03-29 10:04:34
At 10:06 AM -0400 3/29/07, Sam Hartman wrote:
Folks, we didn't get a lot of support expressed in the second last
call.  If I were making a consensus call today I'd say we do not have
consensus to publish draft-housley-tls-authz-extns as a proposed
standard given the IPR claims against it.

However Russ pointed out to me that it may be that people thought this
was a typical last call where silence meant agreement.  I think even
under that interpretation things look grim: silence means agreement
with the prevailing expressed opinion.


But to make absolutely sure I propose to conduct a last call to
confirm that we don't have consensus to publish as a proposed
standard.  Does this seem like the right approach to folks?  I plan to
take some next step within the next couple of days based on input.

I'm sorry this issue is taking up so much of the community's time.

I thought Eric Rescorla and Pasi Eronen had suggested that this document
be evaluated by the TLS working group and the IPR terms evaluated there.
I have that suggestion in an email thread on the main IETF list, started by
Eric and with the thread title "Last Call Comments on 
draft-housley-tls-authz-07".
I personally believe that would be a sensible way forward, as it seems
likely that the working group would be better able to evaluate
the impact of the IPR claims (both RedPhone's and IBM's) than the
main IETF list.

Was there a problem that came up with that way forward in Prauge?

                                regards,
                                        Ted

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>