I agree that an interim meeting would be useful. It seems unlikely that we will make much progress on the mailing list alone.
Cheers, Andrei -----Original Message----- From: Salz, Rich <rsalz=40akamai....@dmarc.ietf.org> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2024 9:00 AM To: Dennis Jackson <ietf=40dennis-jackson...@dmarc.ietf.org>; TLS List <tls@ietf.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [TLS]Re: Discussions on Trust Anchor Negotiation at IETF 120 >The Trust Anchor Identifiers draft was first published only 4 weeks >ago, received less than 10 minutes of discussion in the meeting I strongly agree with this. Well, actually, everyone should be able to agree with this because it's two factual statements. :) I think the challenge of having an interim will be that one group will want to discuss the details of the proposal, while another group will want to discuss the details of the problem we are trying to solve. I hope the chairs will be able to make things explicit and keep the discussions on-topic. If the authors share Sophie's opinion, they could withdraw the Trust Expressions draft and just leave Trust Anchors as something to be discussed. _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
