Re: [perpass] perens-perpass-appropriate-response-01

[Bruce Perens <[e-mail]>]

On 12/04/2013 01:26 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

You could certainly argue that the IETF has historically been too lax about security and privacy vulnerabilities in our specifications - I reviewed some of that history in my plenary talk in Vancouver - so what we "handed over" was a network vulnerable to spying and spoofing.

It was incredibly successful. There was a competing stack design in the OSI protocols which went nowhere. IMO the reason for success was the simplicity. Don't abandon that now.

Yes, the IETF protocols are voluntary. But IETF has a certain degree of cachet by now, and there is a very high probability that the industry will follow IETF's lead because of that. Which IMO gives you the same responsibility that you would have if the protocols were not mandatory.

    Thanks

    Bruce