Re: podling BIS notifications

On Feb 20, 2007, at 10:55 PM, Cliff Schmidt wrote: +1 to everything above -- although, rather than saying a later notice needs to be sent out when the encryption functionality changes, I'd put it as, "a later notice needs to be sent when any information on the prior notice has changed"...but this

Re: podling BIS notifications

What we actually have in svn is a mvn pom which references jxta and bouncycastle: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/runtime/ services/discovery/jxta/pom.xml The bouncycastle reference is there because jxta needs it; there is no direct reference from our code. My a

Re: podling BIS notifications

On 2/20/07, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: BIS notices have to be made if a product contains encryption functionality controlled by the EAR's 5D002 classification, or is specifically designed to make use of a 5D002 classified item (as would the case if the source code contains calls t

Re: podling BIS notifications

BIS notices have to be made if a product contains encryption functionality controlled by the EAR's 5D002 classification, or is specifically designed to make use of a 5D002 classified item (as would the case if the source code contains calls to OpenSSL or JCE interfaces), or if any released package

Re: podling BIS notifications

Notta problem... I'd rather stick to writing code anyway ;-). Thanks for the correction. - James Roy T. Fielding wrote: > I noticed yesterday that James Snell was being very proactive > and submitted the correct BIS notification for Abdera. > >

Re: podling BIS notifications

Hi Roy On a similar subject, Apache Tuscany is going to have similar dependencies and we are trying to find out what's the right way to file the notification. Could you please help us on the following thread : http://www.mail-archive.com/general%40incubator.apache.org/msg12626.html -- Luciano