> > Yes No-Objection Discuss * Abstain
> >Russ Housley [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ]
>
> Since this document will obsolete RFC 2576, it would be very helpful if
> the document contained a summary of the changes which are implemented by
> this document. I assume that Appendix B is not intended to be included in
> the final RFC. I think that the change summary should be at a much higher
> level than Appendix B.
>
Mmmm... when we still had Scott on the IESG, he always wanted it in
the appendix material as far as I remember. Anyway, it weas in appendix
B when we had rfc2576, which obsoleted 1908, so we are/were just following
what was already in an earlier RFC. I do know that in quite a few RFCs,
such a list of updates occurs in an appendix.
I do not really care about placement. I did not think that Appendix B was
really to be included in the final RFC because it also included other history.> In section 8, the document says: "... USM, with authentication and
> privacy." Please change "privacy" to "confidentiality."
>
Well, we have Authentication and Privcacy protocols in USM. That is how
they have been known since oh mid 90s or so.
So we have a authNoPriv and a authPriv way of communicating.
So I think that sticking to privacy is better given the history and
the name of the fields and bits that we use.
How about ".. USM, with authentication and privacy (also known as
confidentiality)."