Re: [sidr] WGLC: draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-reqs

[Stephen Kent <[e-mail]>]

Randy,
>>> hence the "per se," meaining in and of itself.  some cases of pouring
>>> cement into a router (see london tube) are security issues, some are
>>> not.
>>>
>>> how would you make that more clear?
>> I think Warren’s suggestion of simply eliminating the assertion about
>> whether it’s a security issue, per se or otherwise, and just saying
>> that it’s out of scope is enough for the intro.
> i disagree.  would be interested in hearing other opinions.
>
If just saying that it's out of scope allows  us to move forward with 
this doc,
that works for me.

Steve