> On Jan 24, 2018, at 8:38 AM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, Ben, > > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 3:53 AM, Mirja Kühlewind <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Ben, > > this change rather removed the restriction to not analyze features of > security protocols (other than tcpinc); this is mainly the first sentence. As > we see a closer integration of TLS with QUIC and we in general think that > security features are important, it is actually an important change to allow > us to do some additional work in this space. > > What Mirja said, but more than that - when I chartered TAPS, I was thinking > about choosing between transport protocols, but that's morphing into choosing > paths based on the way each potential path supports those transport > protocols, and paths can differ in the way they treat transport security. So > the working group should be including transport security in its analysis, and > that was excluded in the current charter. > > Does that help?
Yes, and it answers the question I just asked in response to Mirja’s email :-) Would it make sense to put “include transport security in it’s analysis” in the explicitly in-scope bits? > > Spencer > > > Mirjas > > > On 24.01.2018 04:42, Ben Campbell wrote: > Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for > charter-ietf-taps-01-00: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-taps/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Do I read correctly that the only change from the previous charter is to > remove > the paragraph about coordinating with TCPINC? If so, I'm not sure that change > is important enough to justify rechartering, but I won't get in the way if > other people agree with it. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Taps mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Taps mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
