W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-tls@w3.org > July to September 1996

RE: making progress

From: Tom Stephens <tomste@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1996 13:13:44 -0700
Message-Id: <c=US%a=_%p=msft%l=RED-88-MSG-960703201344Z-59635@tide19.microsoft.com>
To: "'Win Treese'" <treese@openmarket.com>
Cc: "'IETF-TLS Working Group'" <ietf-tls@w3.org>
Thanks for the posting Win.

I wanted to clarify a point concerning the process. 

I assume that for the 7/30 deliverables, all that will needed is a
simple posting to the list.  However, for the 8/31 deliverables, what is
the preferred format for the detailed descriptions?  Should these be
submitted to the IETF as Internet-Drafts?  Should these just be
submitted as text files to the mailing list?  Etc.?

Tom Stephens
>From: 	Win Treese[SMTP:treese@openmarket.com]
>Sent: 	Tuesday, July 02, 1996 9:25 PM
>To: 	ietf-tls@w3.org
>Subject: 	making progress
>As noted in the meeting summary, the group has
>decided to move forward from SSL V3.0 as a starting
>point.  The draft posted two weeks ago has been revoked.
>There are a number of issues that we need to resolve,
>most of which have already had discussion on the list.
>A list of the ones I know about (at least) will be included
>when the meeting minutes come out in a few days.
>In order to make rapid progress and have a solid draft
>for discussion in December, we need to identify all of the
>issues we might possibly tackle, get detailed proposals for
>them on the table, debate them, and then merge everything
>into a discussion draft.
>Therefore,  I propose that we proceed as follows:
>7/30/96 All issues on the table, with justifications why they
>               are important. On or about 8/2/96, I will post a
>               summary of where we are. Some issues may be
>               accepted or rejected in ensuing discussion during July.
>8/31/96 Proposed text/detailed descriptions for proposals due.
>9/30/96: Discussion on list of what we should move forward with.
>Early October: document editors/authors meet to hash out
>the text. (Exact set to be determined)
>Mid-October: discussion draft available for review.
>November: discussion on the list, organization of issues remaining
>for discussion at the San Jose meeting.
>December: meet in San Jose.
>I also propose that we limit discussion of this proposal to conclude
>by Friday, 7/12, so we don't get bogged down in process discussions.
>Comments and suggestions welcome, either to the list or to me
>        - Win Treese
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 1996 16:18:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:01:58 UTC