Subject: Re: [Trans] [trans] #41 (rfc6962-bis): missing threat model and security analysis

From: "trans issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 17:25:34 -0000

#41: missing threat model and security analysis

Changes (by [email-masked]):

 * milestone:   => review

Comment:

 This is presumably resolved by the new threat model I-D.

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:               |       Owner:  draft-ietf-trans-
  [email-masked]           |  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect       |      Status:  new
 Priority:  critical     |   Milestone:  review
Component:  rfc6962-bis  |     Version:
 Severity:  -            |  Resolution:
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/41#comment:1>
trans <http://tools.ietf.org/trans/>

---

From: "trans issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 17:59:30 -0000

Comment (by [email-masked]):

 The working group has adopted a threat analysis draft.

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/41#comment:2>
trans <http://tools.ietf.org/trans/>

---

From: "trans issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 17:59:44 -0000

Changes (by [email-masked]):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:               |       Owner:  draft-ietf-trans-
  [email-masked]           |  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect       |      Status:  closed
 Priority:  critical     |   Milestone:  review
Component:  rfc6962-bis  |     Version:
 Severity:  -            |  Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/41#comment:3>
trans <http://tools.ietf.org/trans/>