Security could very well be an area that faces rather different challenges to other areas. It is pretty different to the other areas in that it is rather more intimidating than most and there are many other forums where decisions are made. The IETF doesn't even own X.509, that is ITU, it doesn't own the practices criteria, that is CABForum. New security protocols tend to be proposed in W3C or OASIS. It also tends to be inward looking rather than outward. There is a tendency for the IETF security area to spend its time stopping IETF proposing insecure protocols rather than developing the security infrastructure. Not adding to the store of broken-ness is good, but that is not what the younger security engineers want to spend their time doing. They want to make changes to the PKI infrastructure they work on themselves. On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Carsten Bormann <cabo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Apr 27, 2012, at 16:41, Yoav Nir wrote: > >> Before 1950 2.9% >> 1950 - 1960 16.6% >> 1961 - 1970 33.7% >> 1971 - 1980 32.8% >> After 1980 14.0% > > Nice bell curve, יואב, but you can't pop that soap bubble of perception with the bluntness of raw data :-) > > Maybe just the areas where PHB likes to work in are growing old? :-) > > Many of the people doing the real work in CoRE are in their 20s, or have left that age range just recently. And no, they aren't all academics. I think we have a healthy age mix, with some pretty good gray-haired input as well. > > I'm going to argue for an age column on the blue sheets so we get better data :-) > > Grüße, Carsten > > PS.: Please, don't take any of this seriously. Except for the CoRE age statistics. > Dave Cridland's observations also definitely don't apply to CoRE, except that we do have the stunning range of experience that makes the IETF so valuable. > > PPS.: Is the overall median really 42? > -- Website: http://hallambaker.com/