Zaheduzzaman Sarker has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-add-ike-11: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to 
https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipsecme-add-ike/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for working on this specification.

I don't have transport related issues on this specification.

However, this specification relaxes constrains imposed by RFC8598 but
references it informatively. I think it should reference RFC8598 as normative
reference and also should clearly indicate that in the document header and
abstract. I am assuming this is an oversight but want to discuss it.





_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

Reply via email to