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 > >