Subject: Re: [HASMAT] moving forward - working group name

From: =JeffH <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 15:18:24 -0700

Brandon Sterne <[email-masked]> noted:
 >
 > Personally, I do think WEBAPPSEC is the right name.  Someone pointed out
 > that webappsec.org is registered already, but that space is occupied by
 > the Web Application Security Consortium ...
 >  Other than the domain issue, is this still a problem?

I don't think this is a problem because we're talking about an IETF Working 
Group name here, where there usually isn't a stand-alone external domain name 
used in conjunction with it (tho it does occur sometimes).

That said, WebAppSec is 9 chars and that's a problem for various IETF tooling 
as previously noted (and I can attest to having messed around with "http-state" 
vs "httpstate").

as I said earlier (24-Aug)..

   ... we could use "websec" with the understanding (and explicitness in the
   charter) that it's "minus authn & transport".

   "websec" will [arguably] be easier for IETF newbies to find and grok
   than "hasmat".

=JeffH