I believe that version 24 addresses all of the actionable
comments that the authors have received and I propose
to continue with the publication process by requesting IESG
review.
Stewart
Original Message
Subject:Re: [sidr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-24.txt
All (taking chair hat off),
I agree with Ross's comments below that if the document is last called
it should go through a wg last call (pwe3 and mpls) and through an IETF
last call.
I agree that these last calls could be in parallel is necessary, but I
believe that running the wg last call
Also taking my chair hat off ... as Malcolm stated that G.8113.1
applies to PWs, and the requested allocation is in a registry that
originated in the PWE3 working group, I agree that a PWE3 WG last call
is warranted. This could certainly take place in parallel with the
MPLS WG last call.
Cheers,
On 1/13/2012 1:14 PM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
Thanks, Glen! Can we see (at least) a couple of more hands from people
willing to participate in the editing of this document?
Personally, I think that one editor is enough ;-). I think that we
could use some people providing technical
Inline tp
Tom Petch
From: mpls-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
ext Thomas Nadeau
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 10:30 PM
To: John E Drake
Cc: m...@ietf.org; draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-po...@tools.ietf.org;
ietf@ietf.org; ietf-boun...@ietf.org
On Jan 12, 2012, at
Regarding end-to-end security: I believe we should separate the procedure for
establishing the keys from the actual protection.
I could imagine a couple of different ways to establish the keys.
Does that sound reasonable?
On Jan 13, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Glen Zorn wrote:
On 1/13/2012 1:14 PM,
RE: [Dime] WG Review: Recharter of Diameter Maintenance and Extensions
(dime)Count me.
I remember there was an initial individual submission from Glen and me
regarding end to end security topic.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zorn-dime-n2n-sec-lite-01
unfortunetely not finished due to lacking
On Jan 12, 2012, at 23:16 , Roni Even wrote:
Hi,
I looked at the 08 version and the major issues are addressed.
What about minor issue number 3?
Good point! I will fix (as Stewart suggests, maybe just remove the reference).
To your minor issue (2), I've clarified the structure. Do you
Hi,
I am OK with minor issue 2 now.
Issue 3 was my only point
Roni
-Original Message-
From: Kireeti Kompella [mailto:kire...@juniper.net]
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 7:36 PM
To: Roni Even
Cc: Kireeti Kompella; draft-kompella-l2vpn-l2vpn@tools.ietf.org;
gen-...@ietf.org;
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
security area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat
these comments just
On 2012-01-13 20:59, Stephen Hanna wrote:
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
security area directors. Document editors and WG
Julian,
I'm sure that in your view one sentence is adequate to explain
all the security implications of each status code. However,
you may want to consider that some readers may not have quite
the same deep grasp of the matter that you do. Therefore,
I think it would be wise to provide more
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable Nodes'
(draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-02.txt) as a Proposed Standard
This document is the product of the Internet Area Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Jari Arkko and Ralph Droms.
A URL of
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Handover Keying (HOKEY) Architecture Design'
(draft-ietf-hokey-arch-design-11.txt) as an Informational RFC
This document is the product of the Handover Keying Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Stephen Farrell and Sean Turner.
A URL of
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Guidelines for Development of an Audio Codec Within the IETF'
(draft-ietf-codec-guidelines-08.txt) as an Informational RFC
This document is the product of the Internet Wideband Audio Codec Working
Group.
The IESG contact persons are Robert
A new IETF non-working group email list has been created.
List address: theright...@ietf.org
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/therightkey/
To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/therightkey
Purpose: A number of people are interested in discussing proposals
that have
83rd IETF Meeting
Paris, France
March 25-30, 2012
Host: TBD
Meeting venue: Le Palais des Congres de Paris
http://www.viparis.com/Viparis/exhibition-paris/site/Palais-Congres-Paris-Paris/en/4
Register online at: http://www.ietf.org/meetings/83/
1. Registration
2. Visas Letters of Invitation
17 matches
Mail list logo
