On Tue, Oct 22, 2024, 7:29 AM Salz, Rich <rs...@akamai.com> wrote: > > RFC 2418 specifically says the output of the design team is subject to > > WG consensus. That's not true of the FATT right now: it goes > > separately into Shepard Report, comes after WGLC, etc. Doesn't seem to > > me that it's within what was contemplated there. And what FATT is > > assessing is not a narrow technical thing but a tradeoff between doing > > a lot of specialized work, and being comfortable with the introduced > > risks. > > Yes, using a design team is not exactly what is being said the FATT would > do. > > In my opinion it is close enough to the goal -- do we want formal analysis > for this? -- and it is within the structure and policies of how the IETF > work. Yes, as part of shoving the square FATT peg into the round design > group hole, some things get shaved off: those things which are not > IETF-like. >
I don't think the TLS WG can delegate that this way. > > >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
