Re: [saag] RE: No need for SHA-2 Packet Authentication - Open Let ter to the WG a nd Area Directors

[RJ Atkinson <rja@extremenetworks.com>]

On Tuesday, July 23, 2002, at 01:54 , Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> This discussion is futile.

	Possibly.

> If USG want to make a requirement in this area it is up to the USG to 
> make
> the request to the working group, in particular it is the 
> responsibility of
> NIST which has the primary responsibility for liasing with standards
> organizations.

	IETF does not recognise organisational representation, only individual
representation.  Participation in IETF is entirely voluntary for 
everyone.
Any organisation can create internal standards for itself without IETF
if they choose to do so.  It is preferable that IETF be open enough and
productive enough that folks would choose to bring proposals to IETF,
but it certainly is not a requirement that anyone bring their standards
work to IETF.

	It would be quite reasonable for interested folks to publish an 
informational
or experimental RFC should the IPsec WG choose not to standardise a 
particular
transform of interest to some community of interested folks -- to circle 
back
to the point I've been trying to make for the past several days.

Ran
rja@extremenetworks.com