NODE eb7fe09eRe: Clarification of my remarks about Netscape
"Amanda Walker" <amanda@intercon.com>Tue, 13 Dec 94 08:23:57 PST
> 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.
Amanda Walker
InterCon Systems Corp.
NODE 0b6887cdRe: Clarification of my remarks about Netscape
"Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>Tue, 13 Dec 94 08:29:43 PST
"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