Re: Call for objections: subscription/notification security

I observe that:

1. The major concern people have with adding end-to-end security as a
   work item for this group is that reaching agreement on a
   subscription data format would delay the production of other
   documents.

2. There is no opposition to making the changes necessary to the CPIM
   document to enable effective use of digital signatures with
   notifications, i.e., allowing the use of identifiers that name
   presences services and not presentities in 'From' headers of
   notifications.

3. The now defunct CPIM 02 draft said nothing inconsistent with the
   addition of a common subscription data format.

It appears to me that the CPIM document can be written in such a way
as to anticipate a common subscription data format without requiring
that one be completed.  Therefore, this working group could add
end-to-end security as a work item without delaying the production of
any other documents.  We could simply agree to delay discussion on a 
common subscription data format until after all other documents are
finish.  This approach would eliminate the concern expressed in point 1. 

John



  [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]