Subject: [anonsec] Typo in core draft

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:23:28 -0500

+   bind the same public key.  These certificates need not to have been
+   pre-shared with their peers (e.g., because ephermal, self-signed).

The current text sounds like a requirement that certificates are not
shared with peers.  I think it's more like "These certificates do not
need to be "

Am I correct on this point?  If so, feel free to either submit a new
ID or give me an rfc editor note to apply in the tracker.

Either way I'll put this on the agenda for next week.
_______________________________________________

---

From: Nicolas Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:16:38 -0600

> shared with peers.  I think it's more like "These certificates do not

Yes, that's correct -- the word "do" is missing and should be inserted
before "need to be".

> ID or give me an rfc editor note to apply in the tracker.

The note is this:

    Add the word "do" before "need to" in the last sentence of the
    parapgraph that starts "Nodes wishing to be treated as BTNS
    nodes..." in section 2.

> Either way I'll put this on the agenda for next week.

Thanks.

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 10:38:33 -0500

I've inserted the following into the ballot:

Note to RFC Editor

Section 2:
old: bind the same public key.  These certificates need not to have been
new: bind the same public key.  These certificates do not need to be