On 12/13/2013 01:13 PM, Eliot Lear wrote:
Stephen,
On 12/13/13 2:04 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Anyway, how's this for a suggestion, say placed somewhere near
the end of section 2:
Working groups and other sources of IETF specifications
need to be able to describe how they have considered
pervasive monitoring, and if the attack is relevant to
their work, to be able to justify related design
decisions.
This does not mean that a new "pervasive monitoring
considerations" is required in Internet-drafts or
other documentation - it simply means that, if asked,
there needs to be a good answer to the question "is
pervasive monitoring relevant to this work and if so
how has it been addressed?"
Thank you, that is precisely the sort of text I was looking for.
Cool. Added to my to-do list. [1]
Be interested in knowing if you're also ok with the earlier
suggested change? [2] I think that matches well with adding
the above as well.
S.
[1] http://down.dsg.cs.tcd.ie/misc/ppbcp-text-suggestions.txt
[2] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg84888.html
Eliot