[saag] Re: draft update on discussion on crypto practices at IETF

Hiya,

On 22/01/2025 19:12, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> We know what SEC does
 >
> I disagree with that on a factual basis. In the last year, I have
> had at least three people express surprise that some Security Area
> registries allow Internet Drafts as references.

There's a related (almost inverse) controversy as well: some
people assert that having a code-point associated with an I-D
means that no RFC ought later be produced.

I think more discussion of these topics in the security area
and more broadly could be useful - if we reach consensus, then
great, if not, we may be able to try document something that
helps avoid repeating arguments at least.

Cheers,
S.

PS: This I-D seems significantly improved vs. the previous one,
so good job on improving the text!

_______________________________________________
saag mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

wnsEABYIACMWIQQwbnhHy1kPJkWsM6fk2On5l6gz3QUCZ5FlQwUDAAAAAAAKCRDk2On5l6gz3cH4
AP9+oU8DGNPAt0hMvd3ndZOHG1noHWVj11RqqFOWmLMDbQEAgYyfJQtscoLiszr0OyO6P0EgJ9J+
LxOCMa5HSwK2WAY=
=FcRN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----