Re: [tcpm] [OPSEC] draft-gont-tcp-security

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

Lars Eggert wrote:

>> P.S.: Is there any specific proposal/advice to pursue this effort?
>> There's has been some talk about tcpm vs opsec, but so far it is not
>> clear to me how to proceed here.
> 
> if the IETF decides to work on this, I believe TCPM would be the most
> appropriate group, given that that's where the TCP expertise is. I'm
> fully OK with doing this in cooperation with OPSEC, maybe via a joint WG
> last call or other means, if they desire this.

Any plans on how to proceed? So far we have version -00 of the
individual submission, but it's not clear to me how to proceed....



> One question: If the IETF decides to publish a document in this space,
> and if you decide to offer draft-gont-tcp-security as a starting point
> for this work, are the UK CNPI and you as the author OK with the IETF WG
> obtaining change control? The WG consensus process would likely lead to
> changes compared to the current version, probably even significant changes.

Both UK CPNI and me are OK with the document being modified to reflect
IETF consensus. However, we do expect me to continue as the document
author, and UK CPNI to continue as the author's affiliation (there's
nothing unusual with this... but considering that strictly speaking once
a document is accepted by a WG the author may be changed, I'm just
clarifying that while neither UK CPNI nor me have problems with the
document reflecting WG consensus, we do expect the author (Fernando
Gont) and the author's affiliation (UK CPNI) to remain "as is").

Thanks!

Kind regards,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: [e-mail] || [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1