From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 08:51:04 -0500 (CDT)

Housley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WG Last Call: Clarifications and AES - End of Last Call 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 09 Apr 2003 18:33:16 EDT." <[email-masked]> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 19:01:26 -0400
Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Precedence: bulk

In message <[email-masked]>, Ken Raeburn writes:
>"Douglas E. Engert" <[email-masked]> writes:
>> The WG last call for AES has also ended. 
>> There where a number of minor changes, which lok like can be made by the edi
>tor.
>> Based on the comments, in the option of the chair,  AES has also passed WG l
>ast call. 
>> I will be be ready to send the next draft with the minor changes made to the
> IESG as well. 
>
>Does that include the change I proposed to the default iteration
>count, or not?
>
>Ken
>
Default iteration count for what?  AES itself?

		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me)
		http://www.wilyhacker.com (2nd edition of "Firewalls" book)