>> I'd like the charter to clearly state that security considerations are >> outside the scope of the base spec.
> PS: The above does not mean that I think it's a problem if a > WG want to produce a base spec and some other RFC that has the > security analysis and defines useful security mechanisms. I don't think we're disagreeing. I was careful to say "outside the scope of the base spec", as opposed to the scope of the WG. (The base spec is 45 pages long, and can be explained in less than one hour. I will fight to keep it that way.) I'll have a look at the BCP you refer to. Thanks for your input, -- Juliusz _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
