PA-TNC: A Posture Attribute (PA) Protocol Compatible with Trusted Network Connect (TNC)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.
(Tim Polk) Yes
(Ross Callon) No Objection
(Ralph Droms) (was Discuss) No Objection
In the last paragraph of section 3.1, a reference to section 4.5 of the PB spec would be helpful, as section 3.4 of the PB spec really describes very little of the PB-PA header. Similarly, a reference to section 4.5 of the PB spec in section 3.3 would be helpful.
(Lisa Dusseault) No Objection
(Lars Eggert) (was Discuss) No Objection
(Pasi Eronen) No Objection
(Adrian Farrel) No Objection
(Russ Housley) (was Discuss) No Objection
Alexey Melnikov (was Discuss) No Objection
Who is going to be the Designated Expert for the registries created by the document?
(Robert Sparks) No Objection
Comment (2009-07-15 for -)
I strongly agree with Alexey's comment suggesting more discussion of the danger of automatic processing of the content of Remediation instructions. Should the document provide some guidance on what to do if a message contains both a numeric version and a string version (4.2.3, 4.2.4 respectively) draft-sangster-nea-pa-tnc-security-00 is expired. What is the nea wg's current plan for it?