After Valery’s suggestion I wrote to Jeff and Peter on May 24. No reply yet,
but it’s been a holiday weekend in the US.
This particular document was AD-sponsored, so perhaps Keith’s thoughts are more
applicable. For WG docs, however, another aspect to consider is that the WG
owns the doc, the C
On 6/1/21 10:27 AM, Salz, Rich wrote:
After Valery’s suggestion I wrote to Jeff and Peter on May 24. No
reply yet, but it’s been a holiday weekend in the US.
This particular document was AD-sponsored, so perhaps Keith’s thoughts
are more applicable. For WG docs, however, another aspect to con
Salz, Rich wrote:
>
>
>- Some sections mention "server" while other sections does not state
>anything, therefor applying to both client and server. I think the draft
>needs to be very clear on this point.
>
>
>
>- I saw that there was a discussion on client certs and that some
>
