At Fri, 28 Sep 2007 16:39:05 -0400 (EDT), Dean Anderson wrote: > On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, Tim Polk wrote: > > The TLS working group declined to take this work on. That is > > different from not supporting publication. > > The above isn't a true statement. The name of the draft > "draft-housley-tls-authz-extns" contains the name of the working group, > a fact that indicates it is a working group document. After the fraud > by Housley was discovered, and the approval was removed, the TLS Working > Group was asked, but no longer supported the protocol because of the > patent. See Rescorla's message, quoted above. Dean, Your statement above is inaccurate. The -tls- in the document name does not mean that the document is a WG document. It's quite common to have draft-<individual>-<wg> documents, which generally indicates that the named individual believes the document is targets at that WG. As an example, consider the following documents: draft-bryan-p2psip-reload-01.txt draft-jennings-p2psip-asp-00.txt draft-matthews-p2psip-hip-hop-00.txt These are all alternative documents targeted at the P2PSIP WG (there are about 5 more, too) but none have been accepted by the WG. This document has never been a work item of the TLS WG. -Ekr _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf