From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Oct 15 2001 - 04:12:58 CDT
In <20011014142502.5066.qmail@wilhelmina.algonet.se> sommar-usefor@algonet.se (Erland Sommarskog) writes:
>Most of the discussion about authentication etc goes above my head, but
>that much I understand that very little of this is ripe to make it into
>the RFC we are supposed to produce.
>We have already dragged our feed for several years, and we cannot afford
>to waste our time on off-topic threads.
>As far as I recall we say very little about authentication today. There
>are a few hooks for cancel-locks, but I suggest that we drop them and
>focus on getting anything out of the door at all.
The present discussion is indeed ranging far beyond what is required for
out immediate concerns. However, it is not all in vain. It has thrown up
the need for some holding text referring to digital signatures and a
future security extension, and it has thrown up the need for
reconsideration of the wording regarding cancels which arrive early.
As to the first, I proposed a text, which seems acceptable, but it needs
integration and cross-referencing within the rest of the document. As to
the second, see recent post by Brian Palmer, which I shall be responding
to. I think these matters can now be tidied up fairly soon and we can move
on (I was unable to do that tidying up sooner, because of other
pressures).
>Therefore I request the Chairman to close the on-going discussion.
I think the discussion has been useful and indicating the range to future
options we might follow, and with which whatever we do now need to be
compatible.
-- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5