Re: [iri] #107: Clarify requirement for security considerations

<hat type='individual'/>

On 11/16/11 7:15 PM, iri issue tracker wrote:
> #107: Clarify requirement for security considerations
> 
>  Section 4 (Guidelines for Provisional URI/IRI Scheme Registration) allows
>  registration by third parties (even if not
>  on behalf of those who created the scheme).  While many of the required
>  pieces of information are "SHOULD"s, it says:
>  "A valid Security Considerations section, as required by Section 6
>   of [RFC5226]."
> 
>  If the third party does not have access to the spec (e.g., because it's
>  owned by an SDO or company without an open spec), the third party may not
>  be able to write a "valid" security considerations section.  I ran into
>  this personally.
> 
>  Need to either make it a SHOULD, or else clarify what is needed in a
>  "valid" section.

As I recall from the meeting in Taipei, we decided that it was valid to
say "unknown, use at your own risk".

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

Received on Friday, 9 December 2011 18:42:09 UTC