[saag] Re: draft-paulwh-crypto-components-02 ("one of th e reasons")
"Salz, Rich" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.saag |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
* One of the reasons I wanted to get such a draft out that I can point to, is precisely because Security ADs are regularly approached (in private) with requests to AD sponsor some crypto algorithm. That is a reasonable reason, but this draft doesn’t seem to address it. Are you thinking that it does so, albeit indirectly, by pointing out the many criteria that need to be considered? How does this draft help you say no? Or is the intent that you can say “please address the points here and then I’ll consider it” ? _______________________________________________ saag mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]