Re: Security Considerations, IoT and Everything

Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> · Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:05:05 +0200

On 23 Nov 2016, at 3:01, Michael StJohns <mstjohns@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

    On 11/22/2016 5:48 PM, Stephen Farrell
      wrote:

        ps - on another note, why doesn't the SAAG have a datatracker page like
rtgwg?

      Saag's not a WG. People suggest it now and then (and others
dislike the idea). Feel free to raise that too (though I'd
far prefer we discuss 3552bis myself.)

I didn't ask why SAAG is not a WG, I asked why it didn't have a
      datatracker page.  Not having a datatracker page makes it
      difficult to track things that are associated only with the SAAG
      (e.g. the draft 3552 replacement).  In the IETF meeting APP, I
      can't lookup "saag" in the wg list to see what's what for the
      meeting for example and that appears to be a directly related to
      SAAGs lack of datatracker presence.
Hi, Mike. 

While there isn’t a SAAG datatracker page, there is a SAAG github group where you can find (among no other things) the text of rfc3552bis.

Having a datatracker page implies that there are drafts in there. AFAICT this is the first draft that people associate with SAAG so a page didn’t make sense before.

https://github.com/IETF-SAAG

Yoav