- From: Tom Stephens <tomste@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 16:24:37 -0700
- To: "'Eric Murray'" <ericm@lne.com>
- Cc: "'ietf-tls@w3.org'" <ietf-tls@w3.org>
In my response I was referring to an eventual TLS working group draft standard and not the MS strawman document. As for TLS vs. STLP, I could support either or neither...whatever works best for the group. In regards to the meeting, I understand your concern. The meeting minutes and any documents coming out of the meeting should be posted to this alias for entire working group to review. As I understand procedures, nothing coming out of this meeting will have a higher or lesser status than any other proposals submitted for the consideration of the working group. >---------- >From: Eric Murray[SMTP:ericm@lne.com] >Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 1996 3:38 PM >To: Tom Stephens >Cc: ietf-tls@w3.org >Subject: Re: proposed charter for TLS working group > >Tom Stephens writes: >> >> Christopher, >> >> Microsoft is fully committed to STLP. > >By 'STLP' do you mean "Microsoft's proposal" or "the eventual >standard that the TLS working group produces"? > >"STLP" has become overloaded- some people take it mean Microsoft's >"strawman", others are using it as the name of the standard >that this group is discussing. > >I'd like to suggest that we use a different name for the standard >that the working group is supposed to produce. I have been >calling it "TLS", I would like to propose that we call it that. >Using a name that is not owned by any corporate entity should >reduce the amount of political maneuvering that is going on. > >> Two weeks ago I posted to this alias an invitation for all interested >> parties to meet and develop a draft which could be presented to this >> working group at Montreal. I make that proposal again. Would you be >> willing to be in the San Francisco Bay Area during the week of 5/27 ( >> time and location can be announced this week) and resolve the issues you >> and the others on this alias have raised? This would seem to be the >> fastest, most efficient way of meeting the aggressive timeline that has >> been proposed. > >While I applaud your willingness to meet and to accomplish >things, I'm not sure that calling a meeting like this doesn't >voliate the spirit of the IETF. Only a few of the people who >have an interest in the working-group would be able to attend. >I think it would be more in keeping with the spirit of the IETF to >do as much as possible via the mailing list, where all can participate. > > >Having said that, if there's a meeting in the bay area I won't miss it. > > >-- >Eric Murray ericm@lne.com ericm@motorcycle.com >http://www.lne.com/ericm >PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E >27 29 AF > >
Received on Tuesday, 7 May 1996 19:25:45 UTC