On 16/09/17 17:07, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > We had a re-run of the same issues with DPRIV which began with the > assertion that a solution must be found within a year. I don't recall any such assertion. IIRC, DPRIVE was always considered as the start, within the IETF, of a marathon. (At least by anyone credible.) Perhaps you can provide a pointer to that assertion? Aside from that, I'm not clear who you think is being ignored with the current proposal, nor what you think we ought wait upon, so it'd help me understand your objections if you could clarify those aspects. (FWIW, as of now, I don't share your concerns in those respects at all.) S.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature