--On Tuesday, October 13, 2009 12:57 -0700 The IESG <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter > to consider the following document: > > - 'Certified Electronic Mail ' > <draft-gennai-smime-cnipa-pec-05.txt> as a Proposed Standard > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and > solicits final comments on this action. Please send > substantive comments to the ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by > 2009-11-10. Before trying to embark on an in-depth review of this long and complex document, could the IESG explain to the community why it is being processed as a Proposed Standard? After reading quickly through its first few pages, and despite containing a standard IPR clause rather than a "no derivative rights other than to publish" one, it appears to be a translation and adaptation of an existing national standard and set of regulations, with no provisions for transferring change control to the IETF, etc. I also note that it refers to a MUST requirement for "licensed providers" (in Section 5.6) which is usually the type of provision we try very hard to provide in anything Standards-track. The licensing mechanism and authority is not described although it is possible to deduce it from context. That is also a Security Considerations issue, since the next clause, "this access modality guarantees authenticity, integrity and confidentiality of data" seems to amount to "we are from the [Italian] government, therefore we are trustworthy and can guarantee trust". So, from my point of view, if this is going to be processed on Standards Track, it may need work... and that, in turn, implies that we need change control. If, in fact, this is actually a republication of standards material, why process this on Standards Track rather than as an Informational republication of an existing standard from another SDO? thanks, john _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf