Re: ACTION-240 :TLS errors...

Dan,

I spoke with Lisa Dusseault about this. While the last call for comments was
a couple of weeks ago, she feels it is still worth commenting on the new
draft.  The next phase is IESG Evaluation, and the IESG always takes into
account public and private comments.

They prefer public comments at ietf@ietf.org (with the name of the draft in
the Subject), but private comments can be sent to iesg@ietf.org.

Please send us your comments as well (I for one am interested to hear your
feedback).

Rachna


On 7/9/07, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org> wrote:
>
>
> A new version of that one has come out today:
>
>
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hartman-webauth-phishing-04.txt
>   https://datatracker.ietf.org/idtracker/draft-hartman-webauth-phishing/
>
> (I haven't reviewed any of the changes so far, and I fear that I
> dropped the ball on following up on your earlier note.  Since, so
> far, you were the only one to have had comments on it, I'd encourage
> you to send them as individual comments to ldusseault@commerce.net.)
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2007-07-09 09:42:40 -0400, Dan Schutzer wrote:
> > From: Dan Schutzer <dan.schutzer@fstc.org>
> > To: 'Thomas Roessler' <tlr@w3.org>
> > Cc: 'Stephen Farrell' <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, public-wsc-wg@w3.org
> > Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 09:42:40 -0400
> > Subject: RE: ACTION-240 :TLS errors...
> > X-Spam-Level:
> > Message-ID: <026b01c7c22f$05bfdd20$6500a8c0@dschutzer>
> > X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.1.5
> >
> > This was the Trust Anchor, I was thinking of the other IETF draft you
> sent.
> > What is its status of:
> >
> >
> > Sam Hartman's Internet Draft "Requirements for Web Authentication
> Resistant
> > to Phishing" [1] is currently in IETF Last Call; Lisa Dusseault (copied
> > here) is the sponsoring Area Director
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org]
> On
> > Behalf Of Thomas Roessler
> > Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 9:10 AM
> > To: Dan Schutzer
> > Cc: 'Stephen Farrell'; public-wsc-wg@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: ACTION-240 :TLS errors...
> >
> >
> > On 2007-07-09 09:03:09 -0400, Dan Schutzer wrote:
> >
> > > Does that mean there is no IETF work effort? Just as well, it was
> > > duplicate of our work and had lots of things wrong with it.
> >
> > It means that the -00 draft was replaced by the -01 draft:
> >
> >
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wallace-ta-mgmt-problem-statement-
> > 01.txt
> >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:
> public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org]
> > On
> > > Behalf Of Thomas Roessler
> > > Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 8:43 AM
> > > To: Stephen Farrell
> > > Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
> > > Subject: Re: ACTION-240 :TLS errors...
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2007-07-07 17:11:48 +0100, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> > >
> > > > There's a problem statement [1] (note that a -01 has been posted,
> > > > but has yet to show up)
> > >
> > > -00 has gone 404 by now.  Gotta love the IETF's policy of dropping
> > > things.  In any event, is there an elevator speech-ish version of
> > > this?  My printer is about to spit out a 16 page I-D...
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wallace-ta-mgmt-problem-statement-
> > > 00.txt
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > --
> > > Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>