[With chair hat on] Yes, the charter says that we are to make a guidance document. If the working group feels that it’s better to put the specification and guidance in a single document, we can work on that and clear it with the ADs.
Charters can be modified. Yoav > On 29 Apr 2020, at 18:42, Valery Smyslov <smyslov.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Tommy, > >> Hi Valery, >> >> Thanks for bringing this up again. Would you be interested in making this > an >> RFC8229bis instead? I think it would be most useful for an implementer to > fold >> some of these clarifications into the main text itself. How do you feel > about >> that? > > I'd be happy to do it. I also think that a -bis document is more useful. > The reason that this draft is not a rfc8229bis is that one and half > year ago it was a general feeling that more experience need to be > collected before -bis document should be issued. Now it is almost > 3 years since rfc8229 is published, I agree that it's probably time to start > preparing -bis. > > One concern is the current WG charter - > it seems to me that it only allows > clarification document and not a -bis. > It is a question to our chairs and AD - are > we allowed to proceed with rfc8229bis document > with the current charter text or should we update it > and ask for re-chartering? > > Regards, > Valery. > > >> Best, >> Tommy >> >>> On Apr 28, 2020, at 2:54 AM, Valery Smyslov <smyslov.i...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> a one and half year ago at IETF 103 in Bangkok I presented >>> draft-smyslov-ipsecme-tcp-guidelines >>> "Clarifications and Implementation Guidelines for using TCP >>> Encapsulation in IKEv2" >>> > (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-smyslov-ipsecme-tcp-guidelines/). >>>> From my recollection of the meeting and from minutes it was a general >>> feeling in the room that >>> this document was useful for implementers, since it clarified some >>> subtle issues that were not covered in RFC 8229. However, at that time >>> no adoption call was issued since this work would require to update >>> the IPSECME charter. >>> It took over a year to adopt the updated charter and now the WG is >>> chartered for this work with this draft as a possible starting point. >>> The text in the charter: >>> >>> RFC8229, published in 2017, specifies how to encapsulate >>> IKEv2 and ESP traffic in TCP. Implementation experience has >>> revealed that not all situations are covered in RFC8229, and that > may >>> lead to interoperability problems or to suboptimal performance. The >>> WG >>> will provide a document to give implementors more guidance about how >>> to use >>> reliable stream transport in IKEv2 and clarify some issues that have >>> been >>> discovered. >>> >>> However, since it was so long since the WG last discussed the draft, >>> the chairs asked me to send a message to the list to determine whether >>> there is still an interest in the WG to proceed with this work with >>> this draft as a starting point. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Valery. >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> IPsec mailing list >>> IPsec@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec > _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
