Re: WG Chair Nits & start of WG Last Call: draft-ietf-secsh-publickeyfile-06.txt

[Joseph Galbraith <galb-list%vandyke.com@localhost>]

Sorry, this got lost in the clutter and I didn't get it addressed
before I respun the draft.

der Mouse wrote:
> > It looks like we ratholed on the line termination question.  [...]
>
> > I believe the consensus position is to weaken section 3.1, [to]
> > something along the lines of:
>
> >     Implementations SHOULD generate public key files using their
> >     system's local text file representation.
> >
> >     In the event that public key files are not transferred as text
> >     files, implementations SHOULD be prepared to read files using any
> >     of the common line termination sequence, <CR>, <LF> or <CR><LF>.
>
> As one of the noisier participants in the line termination blather, I'm
> prepared to sign off on that wording.  (Maybe the second paragraph
> should say something more like "To ease interoperability in case public
> key files are...", which I think is closer to the intended meaning?)

Hmm... that does seem a little better... I'd be happy to change
it to this... but Bill just sent a publish request.

Bill, should I respin again?  Is this something that can be
done during the RFC editor process?

Thanks,

Joseph