Re: [calsify] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-calext-caldav-attachments-03: (with COMMENT)

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

> On Aug 16, 2017, at 6:02 PM, Cyrus Daboo <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Ben,
> 
> --On August 16, 2017 at 3:16:44 PM -0700 Ben Campbell <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> - 3.12.2: "Access to the managed attachments store in a calendar object
>> resource    SHOULD be restricted to only those calendar users who have
>> access to    that calendar object either directly, or indirectly (via
>> being an    attendee who would receive a scheduling message)."
>> 
>> Why not MUST? When might it make sense to allow others to access
>> attachments?
> 
> Well there are several different ways in which a calendar user might have access to another calendar users' data - such as delegation and sharing. But perhaps that is implied by the statement above. How about (with one typo fixed too):
> 
>  Access to the managed attachments stored in a calendar object resource
>  MUST be restricted to only those calendar users who are authorized to
>  access that calendar object either directly, or indirectly (via being
>  an attendee who would receive a scheduling message).

That works for me. (Although I would have also been happy with a SHOULD along with some guidance on when it might make sense to do otherwise.)

> 
> (If the above is acceptable I will leave it to Ken to make the change since he has the "edit token". Or Alexey can add as an RFC editor note.)
> 
> -- 
> Cyrus Daboo
>