On Sep 17, 2013, at 4:12 AM, Stephen Farrell <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> Jeff raised tcpcrypt [1] in his earlier email.

I personally thought tcpcrypt was an awesome idea. It was, IIRC, "down talked" 
by some of the people who have been more instrumental in blocking other solid 
security suggestions, like zRTP. Possibly even for technical reasons, but 
that's a debate worth reliving.

Perhaps we could also consider a "policy" level of document, perhaps a BCP, 
that sets high goals for security and surveillance resistance in all new work.  
A formal declaration that fundamental security IS a priority, that protocols 
lacking it "harm the Internet" just  as badly as those lacking congestion 
control.

--
Dean

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

_______________________________________________
perpass mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass

Reply via email to