I recommend that if a reviewer did not find the answer to the simple
security question then the answer should be clear in the document. Please
note that this protocol has many RFCs involved but still this draft needs
to answer clearly the security threat questions. I think maybe
the confusion is th
On Friday, January 31, 2014, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Thanks Scott.
> In the interest of being clear about my position, I support publication
> of 04 but do not support publication of 05.
I don't know why you object 05.
>
> I think all the discussion that is useful has happened and all that
> remai