On 1/14/2014 1:02 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
The point of the paragraph is to declare PM to be something that
should be considered at architecture time, i.e. early in the design
process,
Over the years, my own interest in the potential influence of security
concerns in protocol development work has been less due to security
benefits -- not that those aren't important -- but due to the increased
discipline it ought to require in the development process.
Note that I said 'ought'. Working groups are pretty erratic about doing
architecture initially, then followed by details. Not never, but also
far from always.
In other words, a nice unintended consequence of PM concerns might be to
press more regularly for that early, clear architecture work, if only to
get that early, clear PM consideration...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net