Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Apurva, I also agree with Pat’s suggested change. One should not include the cipher as default if there is a knowledge/proof that it will be compromised in future. I assume this is not the case here. The current language
however indicates that. In addition, it does not mention a time line when this default cipher may be obsolete.
So my approve vote is conditional.
Regards, _Subir From: owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org]
On Behalf Of Mody, Apurva (US) Dear All, During the IEEE 802 November 2017 Plenary meeting, we had tabled this motion to send the IEEE 802.22b response to the ISO/IEC/JTC1 due to lack of appropriate words for the response.
The EC did not like the words as were discussed and suggested in the ISO/JTC1 Standing committee.
After discussions with Andrew Myles, we have agreed to a slight change in the response to the comment made by the China NB.
Note – The 802.22b-2015 Draft has been approved to be an ISO Standard. So this response is being sent to them as a courtesy.
I am attaching the original EC motions package, and the Draft Response document with marked up text that highlights what changed.
Paul approves starting an EC e-mail ballot and Steve has re-agreed to second the motion. Motion: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Move: Apurva Mody Second: Steve Shellhammer For: Against: Abstain: Start of ballot: Tuesday 16th January 2018 Dr. Apurva N. Mody Chair, IEEE 802.22 Working Group Chairman, WhiteSpace Alliance Acting Chair, National Spectrum Consortium
---------- This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
|