Re: ID-NITS on: draft-bellifemine-urn-fipa-00.txt

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>]

In message <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B155017C0CCD@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.c
om>, "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" writes:
>I believe security ADs have been pushing back on text like
>  "No special security considertaions"
>Text aka
>  "has the same general consideration as all URNs, but no others".
>Is better. Add a ptr to a RFC (or other doc) where the security
>considerations for URNs are discussed, and I think you are OK.

Precisely.
>
>Well... that is how I have been dealing the the sec cons section
>in docs that I get on my desk lately.
>

Thanks.

		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me)
		http://www.wilyhacker.com (2nd edition of "Firewalls" book)