Subject: IPP>SEC - getting rid of the security document

From: Roger K Debry <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 14:26:18 -0400

Carl-Uno,

Sorry that I missed the point of the Munich discussion.  I had thought at our
last IPP meeting we discussed perhaps keeping the security document as an
Informational RFC.  If we don't do this, we end up copying many pages to the
model document, or losing a lot of the background on security considerations.

I'm willing to go either way, but want to be sure we all agree on moving
significant
content from the security document to the model document. Then I think we have
to
settle on moving sections over in bulk, or cutting it up and dispersing it
throughout
the model document in various sections where it applies.

Roger K deBry
Senior Technical Staff Member
Architecture and Technology
IBM Printing Systems
email: [email-masked]
phone: 1-303-924-4080

---

From: Carl-Uno Manros <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 12:16:08 PDT

Roger,

the notion that the security document be an informational one and the
simultanous requirement to have security in all documents that go for the
standards track do not mix well.  As there is a special section required
for security considerations in the standards track documents, my assumption
was that we could move most of the text in bulk, mainly deciding what goes
where between the Model and Protocol documents.  We might consider moving
some of the background security stuff into the Requirements document, which
also needs some updating before we are done.

Carl-Uno

>Architecture and Technology
Carl-Uno Manros
Principal Engineer - Advanced Printing Standards - Xerox Corporation
701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231
Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514
Email: [email-masked]