This seems wise to me, and a bare minimum indeed. Nadim Kobeissi Symbolic Software • https://symbolic.software
> On 20 Feb 2026, at 5:11 PM, Salz, Rich <[email protected]> > wrote: > > FWIW, I read that as meaning a fresh WGLC not one limited to the > diff. And I think it'd be unwise to process this as if it weren't > as controversial as it clearly is. > > I agree. > > I suggest that the current WGLC be scrapped. Wait at least a week for the > traffic to dry up. Then issue a new WGLC with a completely different subject > line and point out that discussions on previous email threads do not count as > part of determining consensus, if you can do that. Run that WGLC until the > doc-cutoff for the IETF meeting, and put it on the agenda asking folks to not > repeat what they’ve already posted. > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
