I agree with Phillips comments and the FSTC stands ready to help
-----Original Message-----
From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip [mailto:pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com]
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 9:21 AM
To: Eliot Lear; IETF Discussion;
ietf-http-auth(_at_)lists(_dot_)osafoundation(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: [Ietf-http-auth] Re: Next step on web
phishingdraft(draft-hartman-webauth-phishing-05.txt)
[mailto:ietf-http-auth-bounces(_at_)osafoundation(_dot_)org] On Behalf
Of Eliot Lear
Perhaps Sam and Lisa can explain a bit more as to what
process they intend to use. It seems that Alexey is
providing a forum for discussion to improve the document, and
I see nothing wrong with that. I would imagine that both the
IESG and the community will still get their say, so what
precisely is the problem?
This having been said, it seems to me that in order to
address EKR's (and perhaps others') concerns, the document
will need substantial work. I welcome efforts to improve
that work. Where should that happen? Must Sam do it alone?
Its an architecture issue. It is the type of issue that I would like to see
the IAB take up in combination with the other principal stakeholders here -
the banks, the ISPs.
We do have some resources to draw on here, the Anti-Phishing Working Group
and FSTC.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf