Re: Last Call: <draft-farrell-perpass-attack-02.txt> (Pervasive Monitoring is an Attack) to Best Current Practice

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I think if we want to do a practice solution roadmap together we need the draft to add more editors for diversity or include at least two more (recommending Dave and Melinda). Secondly the draft to state relating to the current plan practice what IAB and IESG should do? And what WGs should do? Is there a team work between the bodies or there is continuous separation as old days? Why the draft only states for IETF community confirmation and responsibilities and ignores the IAB and IESG responsibilities in future actions? Couldn't this draft be a joint work of all bodies?

IMHO the previous IESG and IAB are responsible for the defined attacks as well and they should take different strategies in working with IETF community. The draft should be written in a way to guide bottom designs but also upper designs. 

AB


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]