Re: I-D ACTION:draft-galb-secsh-publickey-subsystem-02.txt

[Jon Bright <jon%siliconcircus.com@localhost>]

Hi Darren,

Darren J Moffat wrote:

> In addition to this didn't we have consensus that this was a working group
> item ?  If so it should be called draft-ietf-secsh-publickey-subsystem-XX.txt

I mailed Bill both via the group and privately asking if this was to 
become a WG item - I've not yet had a reply (though I haven't followed 
up, I assume he's a busy man).  The other open question is the naming of 
the subsystem if it becomes a WG item - i.e. should it still be 
@vandyke.com.

Additionally, from the last minutes:

Expected before next IETF:
[...]
	Discussion of whether to accept individual submissions as WG items:
	draft-galb-secsh-publickey-subsystem-01.txt [mcclure]

So, although I'd be happy to submit it under that name, I don't think 
there's yet consensus.  I'll hold off for a day or so on submitting the 
completed version, to see if there's clarification of which name to 
submit it under :-)

--
Jon Bright
Silicon Circus Ltd.
http://www.siliconcircus.com