Subject: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Requirements terminology reconciliation with Terminology draft (#67)

From: adammontville <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 15:04:09 -0800

Section 2 of the requirements draft defines some terms.  Have these been reconciled with our terminology draft?  Probably a question for @henkbirkholz as well as @ncamwing 

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/67