Me too!
> -----Original Message----- > From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 2:08 AM > To: Ronald Bonica > Cc: Hannes Tschofenig; [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [wpkops] FW: Adrian Farrel's Block on charter-ietf-wpkops- > 00-01: (with BLOCK) > > Hi Ron, Hi Adrian, > > I am curious what the blocking objection is when the text that Adrian > proposes does not in any way change the charter. > > Ciao > Hannes > > On Jan 30, 2013, at 10:06 PM, Ronald Bonica wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > Adrian Farrel has posted a blocking objection to the proposed WPKOPS > charter and offered alternative text (attached). IMHO, the text that > Adrian proposes does not in any way change the WG's charter. > > > > Does anyone object to using Adrian's alternative text? > > > > Ron > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 12:47 PM > >> To: Ronald Bonica; 'The IESG' > >> Subject: RE: Adrian Farrel's Block on charter-ietf-wpkops-00-01: > >> (with > >> BLOCK) > >> > >> Alright Ron, > >> > >> How does the attached look? I believe I have captured all of the WG > >> actions, and all of the out of scope items. > >> > >> But I have also tried to remove a lot of the explanation and > history. > >> I can believe this is interesting, but not that it belongs in the > >> charter. > >> > >> If it is no good, throw it out and I will probably Noobj the charter > >> (given the "urgency" :-) > >> > >> A > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf > >>> Of Ronald Bonica > >>> Sent: 30 January 2013 15:12 > >>> To: Adrian Farrel; The IESG > >>> Subject: RE: Adrian Farrel's Block on charter-ietf-wpkops-00-01: > >> (with > >>> BLOCK) > >>> > >>> Adrian, > >>> > >>> The two paragraphs below, taken from the charter, tell you what the > >> WG will do: > >>> > >>> "Starting from the premise that more consistency in Web security > >>> behavior is desirable, a natural first step is to document current > >> and > >>> historic browser and server behavior, including: the trust model on > >>> which they are based; the contents and processing of fields and > >>> extensions; the processing of the various revocation schemes; and > >>> how the TLS stack deals with PKI, including varying interpretations > >>> and implementation errors, as well as state changes visible to the > user. > >>> Where appropriate, specific products and specific versions of those > >>> products will be identified." > >>> > >>> "Future activities may attempt to prescribe how the Web PKI > "should" > >>> work, and the prescription may turn out to be a proper subset of > the > >>> PKIX PKI. However, that task is explicitly not a goal of the > >> proposed > >>> working group. Instead, the group's goal is merely to describe how > >>> the Web PKI "actually" works in the set of browsers and servers > that > >>> are in common use today." > >>> > >>> I wouldn't fault the authors for providing "reams of background > >> text". > >>> When crafting this text, they were very aware of the fact that the > >>> were writing to an audience that had no background in the area. > >>> > >>> If you want to take a crack at wordsmithing the charter, go for it. > >>> > >>> Ron > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > >> Behalf > >>>> Of Adrian Farrel > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 9:37 AM > >>>> To: The IESG > >>>> Subject: Adrian Farrel's Block on charter-ietf-wpkops-00-01: (with > >>>> BLOCK) > >>>> > >>>> Adrian Farrel has entered the following ballot position for > >>>> charter-ietf-wpkops-00-01: Block > >>>> > >>>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to > >>>> all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to > >>>> cut this introductory paragraph, however.) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------ > - > >> - > >>>> -- > >>>> BLOCK: > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------ > - > >> - > >>>> -- > >>>> > >>>> Look, I am in favor of forming this working group, but this is a > >>>> really awful draft charter! Far too much waffle, and far too > little > >>>> about what the WG will actually do. > >>>> > >>>> I could have a stab at rewriting, but I doubt I know wnough about > >>>> the topic to make a good job. > >>>> > >>>> Can someone tell me that the reams of text are actually needed, or > >>>> can someone please take an axe to it. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > > > > <wpkops.txt>_______________________________________________ > > wpkops mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wpkops > _______________________________________________ wpkops mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wpkops
