From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 94 08:29:43 PST
To: "Amanda Walker" <amanda@intercon.com>
Subject: Re: Clarification of my remarks about Netscape
In-Reply-To: <9412131124.AA32568@amanda.dial.intercon.com>
Message-ID: <9412131629.AA12352@snark.imsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



"Amanda Walker" says:
> > Amanda, we're not trying to push anything into the standards track. 
> > We're publishing SSL as an informational RFC, and we have 
> > separately submitted SSL as a proposal to the W3O working group 
> > on security (in parallel with SHTTP and a handful of other 
> > proposals).  Nothing is being pushed into the standards track. 
> 
> Aha.  This was not particularly clear from my reading of the SSL
> spec and the other stuff about SSL on your WWW server.  If you're
> just issuing an informational RFC, then I have just become much less
> annoyed.

You, perhaps, but not me. They are publishing it as an informational
RFC to get an end run around the IETF process in my opinion -- they
fully intend for people to use the protocol on a non-experimental
basis, so it isn't just "information". I may try to have a talk with
the IESG and Postel before this publication happens.

Perry