Re: Russ's comments on draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-10.txt

[Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz%cmu.edu@localhost>]

[My original message was CC'd to my coauthors and to the IESG.  I don't 
know why they were dropped in Ben's reply; I've readded the IESG but will 
assume my coauthors read the ietf-ssh list].

On Wednesday, August 31, 2005 02:35:08 PM -0400 Bill Sommerfeld 
<sommerfeld%sun.com@localhost> wrote:

> On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 14:27, Ben Harris wrote:
> > I observe that RFC 3548 is Informational, so by RFC 3967 the normative
> > reference to it has to be mentioned in the Last Call notice for gsskeyex.
>
> The IETF-wide last call period for gsskeyex; as I understand how 3967 is
> being implemented by the IESG, this would require another last-call
> cycle.
>
> Speaking just for myself, I don't think this degree of simplification is
> worth the delay it would apparently now require.
>
> As a side note, it appears that there isn't yet a repository listing
> informational rfc's which are ok to reference normatively from standards
> track documents.

I agree that this level of simplification is not worth another IETF last 
call.  Since Ben's comment is included above, the IESG should now be aware 
of the issue; let's let them decide if the reference can be updated without 
a new last call, or if it should be left as-is.

-- Jeff