Valery Smyslov <smyslov.i...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I am those that didn't read it during WGLC, or pay attention it before,
but I scanned it.
>> It seems to solve a problem that I don't think that I have.
>>
>> I do not object to publishing it.
>>
>> Given that Notify messages are available without a draft, it might be
that
>> what we have (an ID) is presently enough.
>> (i.e. allocate it a Notify value, and just let it wait for some more
people
>> to implement it.)
> the draft is also used in (now expired)
draft-guthrie-ipsecme-ikev2-hybrid-auth.
Yes, I'm not saying that the draft has no value.
And since all it really does is allocate a Notify value (and document the
structure for it), and *that* can be done without a draft (if you want a FSFC
value).
I'm saying that maybe just get the value allocated, keep the draft alive, and
when (if?) draft-guthrie-ipsecme-ikev2-hybrid-auth finds some implementation,
that it will all be ready.
(by which point, many peple will have read auth-announce will many users)
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
