Re: [Ssh] Re: draft charter

Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hm.  The [email protected] list was used by the original secsh working group and has
> served as a forum for ongoing (if quite low-volume) discussion since then. Why not
> reuse it, instead of setting up a new list? 

I request that [email protected] be abandoned.

It's the "wrong place" -- managed by an agent who doesn't even write a ssh stack.

But it is also not archived in a useful fashion, or well-managed for
subscription as the newer ietf lists are.  [email protected] also appears to
already have a greater number of interested parties subscribed.