Brian, There are well established and effective global venues for this work in ETSI and 3GPP. Why is not being pursued there?
--tony Sent from Samsung Mobile -------- Original message -------- From: Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> Date: 19/02/2013 03:03 (GMT-05:00) To: "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] FW: New Version Notification for draft-pularikkal-opsawg-lawful-intercept-spwifi-00.txt On 19/02/2013 05:39, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) wrote: > Hi Joel, > > I think this is a good point. We had few discussions with Fred Baker as > well on this aspect. RFC-2804 was written 13 years back, many things have > changed since then. The IETF's policy has not changed since then. The arguments we went through in 1999/2000 have not changed since then. The policy is quite short, but to extract two key points: > The IETF has decided not to consider requirements for wiretapping as > part of the process for creating and maintaining IETF standards. > - On the other hand, the IETF believes that mechanisms designed to > facilitate or enable wiretapping, or methods of using other > facilities for such purposes, should be openly described, An example of the latter is RFC 3924. You can describe a solution, but the IETF will not standardise it. Brian _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
