[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Narrow the scope: no new email signature protocol



On Oct 3, 2004, at 11:09 AM, James M Galvin wrote:

I can not support the charter as long as it allows this group to create
a new email signature protocol.

If I'm alone or even a minority in that view, ship it to the IESG. I'll
make my comments again during "Last Call."

If others agree with me now would be a good time to speak up.

On Oct 3, 2004, at 5:02 PM, George Gross wrote:

I too have yet to hear a cogent explaination why S/MIME with appropriate
header information included under the signature would not handle this
problem. If I'm beating a dead horse, plz let me know where this
thrashing has been archived (I acknowledge that I'm new to this list).

I have to agree with Jim and George here.

In addition to the arguments they have given, I want to point out the following: we've been told that time is in short supply and that even taking 2 extra months to understand our requirements will cause problems. If that is so, then we cannot risk time on a new scheme; we must limit the scope of the charter to S/MIME or PGP.

-andy