I don't whether simply "I approve" qualifies as a "substantive" comment; that said, I have NO objections with the document as it stands or in Camellia being used in OpenPGP in general.
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 5:11 PM, The IESG <[email protected]> wrote: > > The IESG has received a request from the An Open Specification for Pretty > > Good Privacy WG (openpgp) to consider the following document: > > - 'The Camellia Cipher in OpenPGP ' > <draft-ietf-openpgp-camellia-04.txt> as an Informational RFC > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > [email protected] mailing lists by 2009-04-23. Exceptionally, > comments may be sent to [email protected] instead. In either case, please > retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > The file can be obtained via > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-openpgp-camellia-04.txt > > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=16578&rfc_flag=0 > > The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D: _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
