[Gen-art] GEN-ART telechat review of draft-farrell-perpass-attack-05

2014-01-31 Thread Scott Brim
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. Document:

Re: [Gen-art] GEN-ART telechat review of draft-farrell-perpass-attack-05

2014-01-31 Thread Dave Crocker
On 1/31/2014 8:55 AM, Scott Brim wrote: First, there are good arguments for publication as Informational , but since it incrementally adds to BCP 72, it should be incorporated there, so BCP is slightly better. It does? It does not say it does. So that linkage is something the reviewer is

Re: [Gen-art] GEN-ART telechat review of draft-farrell-perpass-attack-05

2014-01-31 Thread Sam Hartman
Thanks Scott. In the interest of being clear about my position, I support publication of 04 but do not support publication of 05. I think all the discussion that is useful has happened and all that remains is the consensus call from the sponsoring AD.

Re: [Gen-art] GEN-ART telechat review of draft-farrell-perpass-attack-05

2014-01-31 Thread Abdussalam Baryun
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 remains is