On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 02:22:02PM -0400, Ghanta, Bose wrote: > > Dear Richard and the OpenSSL team, > > I am very sorry for this delay. We have now got our legal review and > approval of the export license. We will be ready now to submit our changes > to OpenSSL organization to get it reviewed and approved. We would like to > use OpenSSL name to our port because we have not made any functional changes > to the product. Our OpenSSL 0.9.6 port is a clean port. We would like to > send our changes to you and cc the [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Our legal just told us that these two addresses are not valid U.S. > government addresses. > > I am enclosing the correspondence as it is for you to see. Could you please > let me know who we should "cc" in our correspondence to you? Please advise > me here. > > " checked with Barry, and neither of those email addresses are valid U.S. > government addresses; thus we should not be sending code to either address. > I would contact the person at OpenSSL to get further clarification on this > issue.
Please check out the following URI: http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/Default.htm Best regards, Lutz -- Lutz Jaenicke [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.aet.TU-Cottbus.DE/personen/jaenicke/ BTU Cottbus, Allgemeine Elektrotechnik Universitaetsplatz 3-4, D-03044 Cottbus ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
