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

RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on the resolution of DR320"

To: "Santosh Chokhani" <chokhani@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on the resolution of DR320"
From: stephen.farrell@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:42:59 +0100 (IST)
Cc: "Denis Pinkas" <denis.pinkas@xxxxxxxx>, ietf-pkix@xxxxxxx
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <82D5657AE1F54347A734BDD33637C879098EBEB1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-pkix/mail-archive/>
List-id: <ietf-pkix.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-pkix-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <OFE9F806AE.F820D8FD-ONC125737C.004AD19D@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <82D5657AE1F54347A734BDD33637C879098EBEB1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: stephen.farrell@xxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-ietf-pkix@xxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.10a



As pointed out, we discussed this some time ago and ended
up with the current 3280bis text. Repeating the arguments
will only consume cycles.

Stephen.

Follow-Ups:
- RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on the resolution of DR320"
  - From: Santosh Chokhani

References:
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on the resolution of DR320"
  - From: Denis Pinkas
- RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on the resolution of DR320"
  - From: Santosh Chokhani

Prev by Date: Re: New Liaison Statement,
Next by Date: RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on the resolution of DR320"
Previous by thread: RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on the resolution of DR320"
Next by thread: RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on the resolution of DR320"
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread