ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TLS] Confirming consensus about one draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation detail

2010-01-28 13:11:21
At 9:49 AM +0100 1/26/10, <Pasi(_dot_)Eronen(_at_)nokia(_dot_)com> wrote:
If the recent discussions have caused you to change your mind (or we
have interpreted your preference incorrectly, or you were not on
either list), please send an email to the TLS WG mailing list by
Tuesday February 2nd. In your reply, please include one of the
following:

  (1) I prefer publishing the specification as-is.

  (2) I prefer *NOT* publishing the specification as-is, and instead
  prefer changing the text so that including the SCSV in secure
  renegotiation ClientHellos is allowed (but not required).

The metadiscussion is raging (in both senses of the word), but the number of 
people expressing an opinion has dropped to near zero. This is just a gentle 
nudge to those who care but have not responded to do so.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf