RE: Closing on shared-key authentication

Tom:

I agree that this comes down to interpretation, but I did actually count
before I sent that  mail.  On the FOR list, I also included D P Kemp,
Phillip M. Hallam-Baker, Dave Wagner, Tom Stephens and Baber Amin.

Whatever:  the idea is "rough" consensus. You don't think we have it and
I do.  In any case, I like Taher's suggestion about modularizing the
document, submitting RFC's and getting running code.  What we want is a
standard that everybody wants to implement without lots of roll-your-own
extensions.  

Barb
bfox@microsoft.com
>----------
>From: 	Tom Weinstein[SMTP:tomw@netscape.com]
>Sent: 	Monday, October 07, 1996 2:47 PM
>To: 	Barb Fox
>Cc: 	'Win Treese'; 'ietf-tls@w3.org'
>Subject: 	Re: Closing on shared-key authentication
>
>Barb Fox wrote:
>> 
>> Tom:
>> 
>> Win is correct that the majority of people who posted on this topic
>> were in favor.
>
>I believe that this is not true.  In pursuit of proof, I went back
>through all of the messages on this topic and classified the opinions
>of all of the people who posted.  Here's the results:
>
>For:
>  Dan Simon  <dansimon@microsoft.com>
>  Barbara Fox  <bfox@microsoft.com>
>  Don Schmidt  <donsch@microsoft.com>
>  Bennet Yee  <bsy@cs.ucsd.edu>
>  John Macko  <jmacko@nisa.compuserve.com>
>  Marc VanHeyningen  <marcvh@spry.com>
>  Tim Dierks  <timd@consensus.com>
>  Keith Ball  <Keith_Ball@novell.com>
>
>Against:
>  Tom Weinstein  <tomw@netscape.com>
>  Phil Karlton  <karlton@netscape.com>
>  Jeff Weinstein  <jsw@netscape.com>
>  Taher ElGamal  <elgamal@netscape.com>
>  Steve Petri  <petri@litronic.com>
>  Rohit Khare  <khare@pest.w3.org>
>  Eric Murray  <ericm@lne.com>
>  Christopher Allen  <ChristopherA@consensus.com>
>  Peter Lipp  <plipp@iaik.tu-graz.ac.at>
>
>Note that a few people were somewhat vague as to what they felt, and I
>primarily classified them based on who they were arguing with.  These
>results may have no relation to how people really feel about this
>proposal, but I think it's at least slightly more valuable than pulling
>results out of thin air.
>
>In any case, I think it is very clear that there's not a clear consensus
>on this issue.
>
>-- 
>You should only break rules of style if you can    | Tom Weinstein
>coherently explain what you gain by so doing.      | tomw@netscape.com
>

Received on Monday, 7 October 1996 18:33:37 UTC