Hi, On 2010-1-20, at 15:45, Michael Welzl wrote: >> I'm not opposed to the WG taking this on is they absolutely want. I >> mainly don't see a reason for this to be a DCCP WG Experimental RFC >> vs. an ICCRG Experimental RFC. > > Just to understand, does this "vs." mean that it could > just as well be an ICCRG Experimental RFC in your > opinion, i.e. you're only stating your opinion about these > two choices here, and not about having MulTFRC as an > Experimental RFC at all or not?
correct. I have no issues with ICCRG publishing it, but I don't see why the WG should, at least at this point. Lars
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
