Re: [Tsvwg] Adopting draft-behringer-tsvwg-rsvp-security-groupkeying as WG item?

[Lars Eggert <[e-mail]>]

On 2008-1-30, at 20:32, ext Francois Le Faucheur IMAP wrote:
> It is not that you are saying that TSVWG should not influence MSEC,  
> but rather you are pointing out that as per IETF procedures,  
> publishing an Informational Track document (even as WG document)  
> does not have the official weight to influence MSEC (and therefore  
> should not be understood/expected to do so).
> Is this right?

Yes. An informational RFC that surveys the solution space does just  
that.

If it comes with a TSVWG consensus behind it, it establishes that  
TSVWG is of the opinion that the characterization of the solution  
space in the RFC is correct (rather than just representing the  
authors' opinion, as an individual submission with the RFC Editor  
would.)

MSEC or some other WG is free to refer to that RFC to help them decide  
which option in the solution space is most applicable to their  
particular use case, of course. But an Informational RFC can't  
recommend one solution as the TSVWG-preferred approach, especially if  
that approach isn't an Internet standard.

Lars