RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-06

["Black, David" <david.black@xxxxxxx>]

Sounds good – I look forward to seeing the revised draft.

 

Thanks,
--David

 

From: Stephen Kent [mailto:kent@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2013 11:04 AM
To: Black, David
Cc: achi@xxxxxxxxxx; General Area Review Team (gen-art@xxxxxxxx); stbryant@xxxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx; sidr@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-06

 

David,

Steve,

 

I think the modified introduction text suffices to connect the PATHSEC and BGPsec terms, but I don’t think that referring to the SIDR WG charter for the PATHSEC goals is reasonable – an RFC is an archive document, whereas a WG charter is not.

The revised intro text now paraphrases the text from the SIDR charter that
describes the path security goals.

Steve