On Apr 20, 2013, at 9:41 AM, Viktor Dukhovni <[email protected]> wrote:
> Would these all be one draft? Are there are other implementors on this > list, and do they have additional material to contribute? If this is a WG document, that decision is ultimately made by the WG. Note that, when a motivated document editor puts additional important considerations in a document, the WG rarely removes them. (Although the WG might significantly change them, often for the better, as we saw in this very WG.) If this is an individual submission, the author is the sole decider of what goes in or not. Things might be removed during IETF Last Call, but that is rare; the most common outcomes are minor additions and changes. Having said all that: > - A description of an implementation of DANE with no changes to > OpenSSL, just a verification callback. RFCs rarely have such descriptions. However, this sounds quite useful, and I would hope that an appendix that has this would be allowed to remain. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ dane mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
