Re: Fwd: [Nea] Re: use of a design team to develop requirements

[Keith Moore <moore at cs.utk.edu>]

-------- Original Message --------

> On 12/13/06, Alan DeKok <aland at deployingradius.com> wrote:
> > Mike Fratto wrote:
> >
> > > Ok, I am not going to act as charter police, but what you are
> > > describing is a matter local policy and a matter of deployed
> > > infrastructure regarding both assessment and enforcement.
> >
> >   If all requirements are a matter of local policy, then this WG will
> > never develop a standard.
>
> Nah, local policies are the "WHY". Protocols are the "HOW." It is the
> how that matters, IMHO, to working groups.

WGs are certainly concerned with how, but they're also concerned with 
security implications of their protocols.  It's irresponsible to design 
something that can have harmful consequences without considering those 
consequences and how to reduce their harmful effects.

> >   How does the TNC overlap with NEA?  The chair of NEA is also the chair
> > of TNC, but I haven't seen any statement about that topic.
>
> To see how the the *functions* of PA, PB, and PT, as defined in the
> charter are also defined by these other frameworks are related to the
> work proposed by the NEA, read:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/network/nap/default.mspx
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/netsol/ns466/networking_solutions_package.html
> https://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/groups/network/

Seems like way too much prior work is being assumed to be relevant by 
certain members of this group.  Protocols that weren't designed to work 
at Internet scale tend to be hard to adapt to Internet scale.

Keith


_______________________________________________
Nea mailing list
Nea at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea