-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
>
>
> Please translate your grouchiness into concrete suggestions on what
> if anything should change in draft. There are so many different issues
> being discussed here that your +1 one is essentially useless because
> it doesn't track to anything actionable.
I think we should fall back to a minimal SSP that contains only the "I-
SIGN-ALL" policy, and we let the real-world deployment and desires for
additions control more in SSP than that. SSP2 can start in a year or
two, and then we see what is needed in the real world. We can even
have experimental things in the field to test them.
Jon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Universal 2.6.3
Charset: US-ASCII
wj8DBQFHjqa2sTedWZOD3gYRAoZhAKCCalYvImeJrhB07fv6jS59s8l3LACeM7TS
v7K/BLZqwg76skcocMPmaUk=
=LHa/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
