-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 27 Jun 2000, Randy Bush wrote:
Would it be proper for someone (such as myself) to simply write an RFC documenting the best current practice? Should this come prior to the formation of a working group (if one indeed occurs?)
i think we are using the wrong mailing list for this discussion.
but a wg is spun up o if there is work to be done that needs development and consensus. as you sound like you plan to document an existing protocol, this is not the case o if you do think there is work to be done that needs development and consensus, then we usually see if there is sufficient momentum by having a bof o these days, unless a topic is obviously hot, to get a bof slot needs a bit of homework, namely an active discussion usually happing on a work-item-specific mailing list and an internet-draft either published (as -00 or whatever) or at least well along in process
i suspect that this discussion is best held elsewhere. i would have said the pgp-keyserver-folk@flame.org list, except it seems to be oriented toward one semi-commercial product. but i am most likely misconstruing it.
Yep. The pgp-keyserver-folk list is independant of any commercial product, and covers all three existing keyservers. Let's discuss this there. (For the keyserver-folks people now entering this conversation, we're discussing the need for an RFC or other suitable documentation, if we are to get any involvement from major network service providers -- that's the conversation in a nutshell.) - --Len. __ L. Sassaman System Administrator | "Everything looks bad Technology Consultant | if you remember it." icq.. 10735603 | pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi | --Homer Simpson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred. iD8DBQE5WUmhPYrxsgmsCmoRAlpLAKDOPhSlTYbggHJjyRB+H2TOtWwI0gCgodqB hgB0Ifj48sa/JsdQ0LwKkEo= =/ckQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----