On 7 September 2012 01:09, =JeffH <[email protected]> wrote: > I am supportive of this initiative, and intend to participate. > > In terms of quick comments on draft charter, having pointers to the existing > work would be good, e.g.. > > Certificate Transparency: Spec and Working Code > http://www.links.org/?p=1226 > http://code.google.com/p/certificate-transparency/source/browse/ > > Certificate Transparency Version 2 > http://www.links.org/?p=1259 > http://sump2.links.org/files/CertificateTransparencyVersion2.pdf > > It looks like upon a quick skim that the I-D source might have kept up with > CertificateTransparencyVersion2.pdf.. > > http://code.google.com/p/certificate-transparency/source/browse/doc/sunlight.xml > > yes?
Yes - actually consistent with v2.1a, which I just uploaded to www.links.org. > Having that I-D submitted before 24-Sep would be helpful in terms of getting > an actual BoF scheduled (remember I-Ds can be very drafty and rough) Will do - we're going to add some more to it next week so I'll wait for that. > > HTH > > =JeffH > > _______________________________________________ therightkey mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/therightkey
