W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-usable-authentication@w3.org > January 2009

Re: [IanG] Re: More US bank silliness ( LC-2094)

From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:49:34 -0500
To: mzurko@us.ibm.com
Cc: public-usable-authentication@w3.org
Message-ID: <tsly6x41j1d.fsf@live.mit.edu>




The resolution seem find based on what consensus seems to exist in the
broader community.  I think that we will live to regret not having
clear guidance on self-signed-certificate life cycle, but I can
completely understand why you don't want to be responsible for that.

Received on Wednesday, 21 January 2009 20:50:12 GMT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Anna.Zhuang@nokia.com: "Asking for the guidance on your review process"
Previous message: mzurko@us.ibm.com: "Re: ISSUE-215: Clarify "positive form of identity" language in 6.1.1 ( LC-2063)"
In reply to: mzurko@us.ibm.com: "Re: [IanG] Re: More US bank silliness ( LC-2094)"
Next in thread: Anna.Zhuang@nokia.com: "Asking for the guidance on your review process"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:15 GMT