On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 1:14 PM Deirdre Connolly <durumcrustu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ah if that's an overloaded term we can use another word > I think what you have here is a way to quickly appoint a "Design Team". That's fine. The general WG mailing list may not be appropriate for formal analysis discussion. But I think the WG should follow the guidelines here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-on-design-teams-20011221/ If I look at the slides linked below (maybe these are old), https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/120/materials/slides-120-tls-tls-13-formal-analysis-triage-panel-00 the only issue is this question: "Q: Why isn’t the FATT discussion radically transparent?" It's fine for discussion to be private according to Design Team guidelines, but the membership needs to be public, at least according to the IESG statement. I hope that approach is sufficient to move forward. thanks, Rob
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
