On Wed, Apr 8, 2026, 1:26 PM Rob Sayre <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2026 at 12:41 PM D. J. Bernstein <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > 1) The IEEE group wants an RFC. They can advocate for this just as
>> > anyone else can. (yes!)
>>
>
> ...
>
>
>>
>> This rule isn't merely about who's allowed to respond to last calls.
>> It's about _all_ participation in a WG.
>>
>
> ...
>
> It's interesting. I think we agree on the technical point, or at least
> it's pretty close.
>
> But I don't do appeals unless they are sure to be rejected, so they are
> just graffiti.
>

Groucho Marxism? Or a typo? (For benefit of those unfamiliar with Groucho
he is said to have resigned from the Friars Club of Beverly Hills saying he
didn't want to be a member of any club that would accept people like him.)


> The reason is that appeals lend legitimacy to the broken process and bad
> decision making.
>

Surely if an appeal is sustained then it fixes it? I've seen this happen
where iirc the chairs just got confused and the appeal straightened it all
out.


> This will just be another busted WiFi encryption standard if we are right.
> If we're wrong, well, good.
>
> thanks,
> Rob
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>


Astra mortemque praestare gradatim
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to