Hi Orin, How does this relate to the new drafts for Opportunistic Security? It seems to me that at least the TLS level should be synchronised. So maybe it makes sense to split this up, go ahead with opportunistic security profiles for certain applications (= OS + DEEP, part 1), enhanced with further privacy measures for email (= DEEP, part 2)?
Ralph On 3 March 2015 at 10:45, Orit Levin (LCA) <[email protected]> wrote: > During the last meeting, I expressed my opinion (as an individual, not as > a chair) that it would be reasonable to split the draft into two: > 1. A "best current practices for e-mail" document expanding the > tls-bcp document and based on existing protocols and mechanisms. > 2. A separate "proposed standard" document defining new mechanisms in > order to improve email security, etc. These correspond to definitions in > sections 5, 6, 7, the related procedures throughout the document, and the > IANA Considerations. > > There was no time for this discussion at the meeting, so we agreed to move > it to the list. I would like to know what people think about this direction. > Thanks, > Orit. > > _______________________________________________ > Uta mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta >
_______________________________________________ Uta mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
