Re: [OPSAWG] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-17: (with COMMENT)

On 2/9/18 4:31 PM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) wrote: -Original Message- From: Adam Roach [mailto:a...@nostrum.com] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2018 3:34 PM To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) Cc: Kathleen Moriarty; The IESG; opsawg@ietf.org; Warren Kumari; Paul Hoffman;

Re: [OPSAWG] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-17: (with COMMENT)

Responses inline; some text elided. On 2/9/18 8:22 AM, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: --- §2.1.2 -- I am surprised that there is so much discussion of fields that are not generally encrypted in practice (e.g., RTP headers, TCP

Re: [OPSAWG] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-17: (with COMMENT)

Hi Ben, Thanks for checking back through the responses. inline On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: > Hi Kathleen, > > Thanks for your response. Comments inline; I deleted sections that do not > seem to need further discussion. > > Thanks! > > Ben. > >> On

Re: [OPSAWG] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-17: (with COMMENT)

Hi Kathleen, Thanks for your response. Comments inline; I deleted sections that do not seem to need further discussion. Thanks! Ben. > On Feb 9, 2018, at 1:18 PM, Kathleen Moriarty > wrote: > > Hi Ben, > > Thanks again for the comments, responses and

Re: [OPSAWG] Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-10

- Original Message - From: Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 6:43 AM > Hi Tom, > > I submitted a new revision of the draft which addresses your comments. Thank you. > Med, Yes, looks good, Tom Petch > Cheers, > Med > > > -Message d'origine- > >