[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Results of protocol straw poll

Paul Hoffman / VPNC [mailto:paul.hoffman@xxxxxxxx] writes:

> Greetings again. Thank you to everyone who expressed short or long
> opinions on the protocol straw poll. There were 18 public messages
> and 4 private messages. The totals are:
> GetCert:                 4
> PIC:                     7
> No new protocol:         8
> Whatever the leader is:  3
> I think it is safe to assume that the "whatever the leader" votes
> were for "the leader between PIC and GetCert".

Why?  By your count, the leader is "No new protocol".  BTW, I saw several
votes for protocols other than PIC and GetCert which do not appear to be
reflected in the above.  In particular, Uri Blumenthal voted for CRACK, and
Bill Sommerfeld said "either getcert or pic".  Does Uri's vote not count?
If not, why not?  True, CRACK wasn't mentioned as an option in your original
message, but neither was "Whatever" (since when is "Whatever" a valid vote,
except possibly in Florida ;-).  Is Bill's a vote for both or neither?

> This shows a majority of folks want the WG to move forwards with PIC.

Interesting math.  Mod 11?

> I note again that this is not a strong majority; it is closely
> trailed by "no new protocol".

No, it is _led_ by "no new protocol".

> So, would the PIC authors let the WG
> know that status of the current draft? draft-ietf-ipsra-pic-01.txt
> has now expired, but it can easily be revived by turning in a -02
> document.
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --VPN Consortium