Re: [Seamoby] Terminology Draft Needed

Hello folks,

This is a good idea.  Where can we find a list of the acceptable
security terminology to incorporate into the terminology draft?

Regards,
Charlie P.

> "Pat R. Calhoun" wrote:
> 
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> I brought this topic up with the ADs again yesterday, and there seems
> to be agreement that such a document is necessary. However, it would
> be useful if this document also included the security terminology
> that we use, since it conflicts with some of the terms used WGs in
> other areas (e.g. IPSec).
> 
> PatC
> 
> - -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Neumiller [mailto:pneumiller@meshnetworks.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 6:39 AM
> To: manet@itd.nrl.navy.mil; seamoby@ietf.org
> Subject: [Seamoby] Terminology Draft Needed
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have seen Charlie pull out the terminology draft at least a few
> times! :-)  Why can't
> some WG chair in SeaMoby or MANET adopt it as WG draft?
> 
> http://people.nokia.net/~charliep/txt/seamoby/term.txt
> 
> It seems that many times arguments are over terminology.  IMO, I
> would like to
> the SeaMoby WG become a bridge between MANET and MIP technologies,
> especially with respect to AR discovery and CT.  This terminology
> draft would make a very nice addition to the SeaMoby WG draft list.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Phil
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Seamoby mailing list
> Seamoby@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
> 
> iQA/AwUBPEWp+DN1fXKoxmisEQKpKwCgsuQlnVlOxREcl5hKPmD76ZrjI74AoLNh
> bL1hxFHUR1waVYM8pGeJbZW/
> =JrHd
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Seamoby mailing list
Seamoby@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/seamoby