Support to adoption +1. A few minor comments.
* Abstract: Better to give the full name of DSCP for its first time appearance. * Actually, the full name of DSCP (Differentiated Services Field Codepoints) has also mentioned in the main text as well. * The title of this document contains “Differentiated Services Field Codepoints”. Is “Differentiated Services Field Codepoints” the same as DSCP? * Section 2: "[RFC4301], Section 4.1 ... " => "Section 4.1 of [RFC4301] ... "? Similar phrases appear several times. Guilin From: Daniel Migault <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, 3 August 2026 11:22 pm To: Valery Smyslov <[email protected]> Cc: Tero Kivinen <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [IPsec] Re: Call for adoption: draft-mglt-ipsecme-dscp-np-05 (Ends 2026-08-15) Hi, As a co-author I support the adoption of the draft. Yours, Daniel On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 4:25 AM Valery Smyslov <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi, I read the draft and I think that it can be adopted. Regards, Valery. > This message starts a ipsecme WG Call for Adoption of: > draft-mglt-ipsecme-dscp-np-05 > > This Working Group Call for Adoption ends on 2026-08-15 > > Abstract: > This document outlines the DSCP Notification Payload, which, during a > CREATE_CHILD_SA Exchange, explicitly indicates the DSCP code points > that will be encapsulated in the newly established tunnel. This > document updates RFC 4301. > > Please reply to this message and indicate whether or not you support adoption > of this Internet-Draft by the ipsecme WG. Comments to explain your preference > are greatly appreciated. Please reply to all recipients of this message and > include this message in your response. > > Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual > Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [2]. > Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions > of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any. > Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be > found at [3]. > > Thank you. > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/ > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/ > [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/ > > The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mglt-ipsecme-dscp-np/ > > There is also an HTML version available at: > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-mglt-ipsecme-dscp-np-05.html > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-mglt-ipsecme-dscp-np-05 > > _______________________________________________ > IPsec mailing list -- [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > To unsubscribe send an email to > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list -- [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> -- Daniel Migault Ericsson
_______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
