Re: [tcpm] poll for adopting draft-gont-tcp-security

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[Verizon] wrote:

> TCPMers, there was a thread a while ago about working on
> draft-gont-tcp-security in this working group that didn't
> conclusively give us a feeling one way or other:
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcpm/current/msg04489.html
>
> Basically, my understanding is that there are at least a
> handful of people in the WG that think it should be done
> here as a WG item (more likely for Informational rather
> than BCP), and there are also some expressed opinions on
> why it shouldn't.
>
> Given the raw size of the document, if the WG intends to
> take this document on, then we need some people to clearly
> commit to putting cycles into review and contributions to
> the document.  Since it is quite large, and to my knowledge,
> there hasn't been a specific technical review of the content
> on this list, but just discussions about if the idea in
> general is a good or bad thing, we still need to know if
> people are willing to invest their time and energy in this.

I think the further development of this document with the balanced 
approach (cf: 'the requirements' mention and evaluating the mitigations 
with respect to them) is a useful activity, and as such, would like to 
commit cycles to it if it gets adopted.

thanks,
andrew

>
> Please let us know if there is traction for this in the
> near term, and/or we can also discuss it in Stockholm.
>
> ---------------------------
> Wes Eddy
> Network & Systems Architect
> Verizon FNS / NASA GRC
> Office: (216) 433-6682
> ---------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>