Re: Adept Encryption: Was: [saag] DANE should be more prominent (Re: Rev

On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 07:23:16PM +0000, Christian Huitema wrote:

[...]


Thanks for your categorization of objections thus far!  That's very
useful, even if were incomplete: if we could list them all that pithily,
even when no objections remain, it'd be a useful record.

Nico
--

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: [saag] Is opportunistic unauthenticated encryption a waste of time?, (continued) Re: [saag] Is opportunistic unauthenticated encryption a waste of time?, Fernando Gont Re: [saag] Is opportunistic unauthenticated encryption a waste of time?, Dave Crocker Re: [saag] Is opportunistic unauthenticated encryption a waste of time?, joel jaeggli Re: [saag] Is opportunistic unauthenticated encryption a waste of time?, Fernando Gont Re: [saag] Is opportunistic unauthenticated encryption a waste of time?, joel jaeggli Re: [saag] Is opportunistic unauthenticated encryption a waste of time?, Fernando Gont RE: [saag] Is opportunistic unauthenticated encryption a waste of time?, Hosnieh Rafiee Re: [saag] Is opportunistic unauthenticated encryption a waste of time?, Viktor Dukhovni Re: [saag] Adept Encryption: Was: DANE should be more prominent (Re: Review of: Opportunistic Security -03 preview for comment), Stephen Kent RE: Adept Encryption: Was: [saag] DANE should be more prominent (Re: Review of: Opportunistic Security -03 preview for comment), Christian Huitema Re: Adept Encryption: Was: [saag] DANE should be more prominent (Re: Review of: Opportunistic Security -03 preview for comment), Nico Williams <= Re: Adept Encryption: Was: [saag] DANE should be more prominent (Re: Review of: Opportunistic Security -03 preview for comment), Stephen Farrell Re: Adept Encryption: Was: [saag] DANE should be more prominent (Re: Review of: Opportunistic Security -03 preview for comment), Scott Kitterman

Re: Adept Encryption: Was: [saag] DANE should be more prominent (Re: Review of: Opportunistic Security -03 preview for comment)