[Ecrit] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-ecrit-car-crash-22: (with COMMENT)

"Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Thu, 19 January 2017 14:51 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: ecrit@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFB9412941A; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:51:17 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.40.3
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <148483747797.10305.8523660705109689253.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:51:17 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ecrit/H7fiQ-7tVaub-EIeE_E1mlANg8k>
Cc: ecrit@ietf.org, allison.mankin@gmail.com, draft-ietf-ecrit-car-crash@ietf.org, ecrit-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [Ecrit] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-ecrit-car-crash-22: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
List-Id: <ecrit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ecrit/>
List-Post: <mailto:ecrit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 14:51:20 -0000

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ecrit-car-crash-22: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


A phone call that can unlock the doors and turn on an in-car
camera. What could possibly go wrong? I think the security
considerations ought warn more specifically about the
consequences of these options.  This is not a discuss as I
assume that these features are required by US regulators, and
so cannot be removed.  If they were under IETF control, I'd
want to DISCUSS removing them entirely as I suspect that the
overall cost/benefit of these features would imply we'd be
better off without them.