RE: opsec meeting description

["Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>]

Yes, I would like to particpate. 

Regards,

Dan



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org]On Behalf Of Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
> Sent: 20 February, 2004 12:15 AM
> To: Mreview (E-mail)
> Subject: FW: opsec meeting description
> 
> 
> So the OPSEC document: draft-jones-opsec-03.txt
> did get quite a bit of feedback from various people
> on this list. In Seoul we will have a sort of
> panel review (do not know exact format yet).
> 
> Does any of the MIB doctors want to participate.
> I surely hope so.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bert 
> ------- Forwarded Message
> 
> From: Steve Bellovin <smb@research.att.com>
> To: agenda@ietf.org
> Subject: opsec
> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:33:19 -0500
> 
> draft-jones-opsec, which has been proposed for BCP, is somewhat 
> controversial.  Some people claim that its focus is too 
> narrow, or that 
> it mandates functionality that is not yet available.
> 
> This meeting will consist of a focused discussion by a panel of 
> reviewers.  The issues to be considered include:
> 
> 	Should this document, or some successor, be published in
> 	more or less its current form?
> 
> 	What status should the document have?
> 
> 	Is there a need for other, related documents, such as 
> 	operational security requirements for enterprises?
> 
> 	What venue is best for developing this or related documents?
> 	How do we get participation by operators of all sorts?
> 
> 
> 		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb
> 
> 
> 
> ------- End of Forwarded Message
> 
> 
>