On 22 Oct 2014, at 02:02, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
Up one more level: the charter looks pretty out of date in general.
Hi Brian,
The charter itself still reflects our primary focus. I believe it still
accurately reflects the constraints on our scope.
The
On 22/10/2014 23:54, Ray Bellis wrote:
On 22 Oct 2014, at 02:02, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
wrote:
Up one more level: the charter looks pretty out of date in general.
Hi Brian,
The charter itself still reflects our primary focus. I believe it still
accurately
On 10/22/14, 12:46 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 22/10/2014 23:54, Ray Bellis wrote:
On 22 Oct 2014, at 02:02, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
Up one more level: the charter looks pretty out of date in general.
Hi Brian,
The charter itself still reflects our primary
Hi,
I agree with whoever it was that said there is not enough explanation
of the threat model in this draft. The result is that I really can't
evaluate whether the proposed solution is complete or adequate.
The other thing that bothers me is that we need a secure homenet, not
just a secure HNCP.
I agree with whoever it was that said there is not enough explanation
of the threat model in this draft. The result is that I really can't
evaluate whether the proposed solution is complete or adequate.
From my point of view there are two vectors through which you can attack
HNCP - as
