Subject: RE: [Isms] updated preference stats

From: "Blumenthal, Uri" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 17:06:19 -0400

Please count me as "reject OOB". Tnx! 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On Behalf Of Robert Story
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 12:23 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Isms] updated preference stats

Summarizing again, from recent responses. As before, let me know if I've
mis-characterized your opinion. Summarizing 13 responses (details
further
below):

Keying|      For             | Against | Abstain
------+----------------------+---------+-------------
OOB   |  6 (4 Yes, 2 Maybes) |  3 No   | 4 no comment
IB    |  8 (6 Yes, 2 Maybe)  |  1 No   | 4 no comment
EK    | 10 (5 Yes, 5 Maybe)  |  0 No   | 3 no comment

So it appears that encapsulated keying has the broadest support,
even though 50% of that support is as a second choice. Out of band
keying appears to have the most opponents (though may people just stated
a 1st
preference and (mostly) acceptable alternative, and not outright
opposition to
the 3rd choice).

Key:  Y=YES/preference    (y=second pref/implied pref)
      M=MAYBE/second pref (m=implied second pref)
      N=NO
      -=no explicit rejection (no comment)

OOB | IB  | EK  | Name (alphabetical by first name)
----+-----+-----+----------------------------------
 N  |  N  |  Y  | David Harrington
 -  |  y  |  -  | David Perkins
 N  |  Y  |  M  | Ira McDonald
 M  |  -  |  Y  | Juergen Schoenwaelder
 Y  |  M  |  -  | Kaushik Narayan
 Y  |  -  |  -  | Marcus Leech
 Y  |  -  |  M  | Martin Soukup
 N  |  Y  |  M  | Robert Story
 m  |  y  |  Y  | Sam Hartman
 Y  |  -  |  m  | Sharon Chisolm
 -  |  M  |  Y  | Tom Petch
 -  |  Y  |  Y  | Uri Blumenthat
 -  |  Y  |  M  | Wes Hardaker

_______________________________________________
Isms mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms

_______________________________________________
Isms mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms