> The fact that a draft has been adopted by a WG does not mean it will
> get finished and published as a standard. I have seen documents dying,
> I have seen entire WGs dying.
Sure, okay, and funny.
> So do the client/server/crypto/... configuration modules need any
> special handling by the s
The fact that a draft has been adopted by a WG does not mean it will
get finished and published as a standard. I have seen documents dying,
I have seen entire WGs dying.
So do the client/server/crypto/... configuration modules need any
special handling by the server or not? If the answer is no, we
> Perhaps Kent can help us by summarizing why he believes copying is
> needed, i.e., why lazy references by name do not work for credentials
> stored in TPMs.
The truststore and keystore use-case entails the following concepts from
the system-config draft:
- Inactive Until Referenced
https
Hi Chairs,
I see this LS from SA5, https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1818/
Are you planning to cover it during the chairs intro? If not, would it be
possible to add it to the agenda?
Thanks,
Charles
On Mar 29, 2023, at 12:09 AM, Jason Sterne (Nokia)
mailto:jason.ste...@nokia.com>> wrote:
