RE: Continued discussion of RADIUS Crypto-Agility

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

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Glen Zorn (gwz)
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 10:08 PM
> To: David B. Nelson
> Cc: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Continued discussion of RADIUS Crypto-Agility
> 
> David B. Nelson <> allegedly scribbled on Tuesday, July 31, 2007 11:25
> AM:
> 
> > Glen Zorn writes...
> > 
> >> To 1) ignore our charter (not to mention the (at best) 
> disingenuous 
> >> '?' regarding it in the presentation)...
> > 
> > To be fair, the authors of this ID did indicate they knew 
> it was out 
> > of charter scope, and therefore not eligible for the Crypto-Agility 
> > solution, at the time that they requested the presentation slot in 
> > RADEXT.  The "?" apparently came about as a result of 
> discussions in 
> > the O&M Area WG earlier in the week.
> 
> So can we appropriately blame this nonsense (surprise!) on the IESG? 
> 

If finding somebody to blame solves the problem or at least half of it,
I'll step ahead :-)

Seriously, I was the one to recommend the author to ask for a time slot
on the RADEXT agenda. I believe that the RADSEC work is if not within at
least related to the WG scope (but not necessarily as a crypto-agility
solution), although undertaking it would mean an extension of the
charter. I believe it was good for the working group to hear it and
discuss whether there is consensus to include it as a future work item.
This discussion is happening right now, and it's good. 

Dan


--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>