[TLS] Re: FATT Process Updates: Contacting FATT

[S Moonesamy <[e-mail]>]

Hi Usama,
At 04:33 PM 25-04-2026, Muhammad Usama Sardar wrote:
>I am not familiar with this term. I did a quick search but I don't 
>find in IETF context.

Here's an example of a review: 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/Cuv72NQhs_04FlL6F7NL79gX5qc/

>More importantly, could you please elaborate your rationale behind 
>distinguishing 'design team' or 'review group' for the purposes of 
>my proposal? Unless I am missing some subtlety, it seems completely 
>orthogonal to my proposal. So I will leave this for some senior for guidance.

I looked for what might be a closer fit based on what I read in RFC 2418.

>Please see [3], which has links to reports, e.g., see thorough 
>report [4] by Britta Hale for 8773bis. In my proposal, the effort of 
>FATT will be distributed over time, and Verifier will be able to do 
>most of the effort under their guidance and FATT will be able to 
>focus on review.

Thanks for the URL.

>I may be misunderstanding your point here. I believe everybody -- 
>and not just Verifier -- in the IETF is a volunteer.
>
>I cannot speak for other Verifiers. I can speak only for myself. I 
>am willing to do the job for free because this is my job description 
>and I am funded by the German Research Foundation ("Deutsche 
>Forschungsgemeinschaft"). I have fully transparently declared it in 
>Acknowledgment section of my draft [6].

The point is that I keep in mind that the reviewer is a volunteer.

>We may be talking past each other. I believe any reasonable 
>comparison of my proposal

Yes (to the first sentence).

>  should be with the current process. Could you please clarify why 
> this is an additional risk in my proposal compared to the current process?

It's not about risk.  It's about finding common ground.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy