Re: SSH-> Secure Shell renaming is *not* official.

[Tero Kivinen <kivinen%mail.niksula.cs.hut.fi@localhost>]

Marcus Leech writes:
> Tatu Ylonen wrote:
> > I went ahead and made the editorial changes unilaterally in view of
> Tatu, it is inappropriate for you to act on any of this without the consensus
>   of the working group.  Bill Sommerfeld was entirely justified in objecting
>   to this action.

I think changing the document title should be in the hands of the
document editor. Of course WG might be against the renaming and ask
the editor to change it back or to something else. In this case Tatu
renamed the documents to match the official working group name.

Comment about IETF way of selecting names of draft earlier on the
ietf-ssh list from the RJ Atkinson <rja%inet.org@localhost>:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: RJ Atkinson <rja%inet.org@localhost>
To: <denis.bider%denisbider.com@localhost>
Cc: <ietf-ssh%clinet.fi@localhost>
Subject: RE: Renaming SSH-the-standard
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 10:36:47 -0500
Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20010216103331.00a28480@10.30.15.2>
...
        Names of drafts in MANY working groups are not the same as
the official name of the WG.  In practice, names of drafts
are generally chosen by the editors of those drafts, not 
as an official choice by the WG or IETF.  Perhaps you're new
to our wacky ways of doing things in the IETF ?
...
----------------------------------------------------------------------

There has been other cases where there has been no discussion on the
ietf mailing list before renaming the protocol (for example
ISAKMP/Oakley resolution protocol was renamed to IKE without any
previous discussion on the ipsec-list. There might have been some
discussion about renaming in the IETF meeting or in the vpn-backoff,
but no discussion on the list). 

Bill Sommerfeld said in his email:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld%east.sun.com@localhost>
Sender: owner-ietf-ssh%clinet.fi@localhost
To: ietf-ssh%clinet.fi@localhost
Subject: Your working group chair is GRUMPY.
Message-Id: <200102161827.f1GIRQ923087%thunk.east.sun.com@localhost>
...
 - At the present time, based both on comments to the mailing list and
to me in private I do not see consensus either for or against renaming
the working group and protocol.

 - I am reluctant to initiate renaming unless I see SMOOTH CONSENSUS.
...
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Counting from the ietf-ssh list there hasn't been single clear "no to
renaming" before new drafts came out. Before Sommerfeld's email there
had been at least two yes on the list (one suggesting it, in the first
place, and another saying that, yes we can rename), so I assume there
has been some private emails to Sommerfeld against the renaming based
on his wording on the email.

After that the situation on the ietf-list didn't change at all, there
was just some discussion about names (good or bad) but no more yes or
no votes.

When Tatu called me on the Friday afternoon and asked would it be ok
to submit the new version of drafts, that also had been renamed, or
not to submit them at all (the deadline was in few hours), I didn't
see any reason why not submit. There hadn't been single person saying
"No" on the ietf-ssh list, thus I think we had consensus, or most
people simply dont care. If there has been private discussion
somewhere, I don't know about it.

Here is my summary of the renameing discussion between the first
email suggesting it (Feb 16 15:07:20) and when the draft announcements 
came out (Mar 6 16:27:40).

Yes to rename:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>
	Suggested renaming in the ietf-ssh list

"denis bider" <denis.bider%globera.com@localhost>
	"We can rename the standard, and from the naming point of view,
	 it would make sense to do so - "secure shell" doesn't resemble
	 what the protocol does."
----------------------------------------------------------------------

No to renaming
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(none)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

No clear yes or no to renaming:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jason R Thorpe <thorpej%zembu.com@localhost>
	Discussion about names, no clear yes or no. 

RJ Atkinson <rja%inet.org@localhost>
	Said that secure shell name is ok, but didn't say anything
	about ssh name.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
After that drafts came out there has been three more "No" emails to
the list from Bill Sommerfeld, Thor Simon and Jason Thorpe.
-- 
kivinen%ssh.fi@localhost                               Work : +358 303 9870
SSH Communications Security                  http://www.ssh.fi/
SSH IPSEC Toolkit                            http://www.ssh.fi/ipsec/