will push 16
randy
___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 08:18:06PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
> >>> If we're going with "[#RPKI Signature] address range MUST match [inetnum:
> >>> followed to get here]", then there are probably a couple places that still
> >>> talk about "covered by" that should catch up.
> >>
> >> don't find any
>>> If we're going with "[#RPKI Signature] address range MUST match [inetnum:
>>> followed to get here]", then there are probably a couple places that still
>>> talk about "covered by" that should catch up.
>>
>> don't find any
>>
>> what i did find is that i forgot to remove
>>
>> The
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 03:12:21PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
> > If we're going with "[#RPKI Signature] address range MUST match [inetnum:
> > followed to get here]", then there are probably a couple places that still
> > talk about "covered by" that should catch up.
>
> don't find any
>
> what i
mornin' folk,
thanks, rob. to be honest, i did not track process.
> When you get a chance, please can you check whether -15 is sufficient
> to clear your discuss. I think that is the last step to progressing
> this doc.
shout if you need anything from my side.
randy
_
Hi Ben,
When you get a chance, please can you check whether -15 is sufficient to clear
your discuss. I think that is the last step to progressing this doc.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds/
Regards,
Rob
> -Original Message-
> From: iesg On Behalf O
> If we're going with "[#RPKI Signature] address range MUST match [inetnum:
> followed to get here]", then there are probably a couple places that still
> talk about "covered by" that should catch up.
don't find any
what i did find is that i forgot to remove
The address range of the sig
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 02:17:23PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
> i have a vague hope -14, just published, addresses all currently
> expressed concerns. but i am under my quota for wrongness for the day.
If we're going with "[#RPKI Signature] address range MUST match [inetnum:
followed to get here]",
i have a vague hope -14, just published, addresses all currently
expressed concerns. but i am under my quota for wrongness for the day.
randy
___
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
> Rob should probably weigh in on how much review such a change would need.
once i have the next rev out, we should look at the diff to -09 or so.
i suspect that giving the wg a week to whine would not be inappropriate.
but such decisions are above my pay grade.
randy
___
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:43:24PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
> >>> Publishing this document on the stanards-track does make one wonder
> >>> whether RFC 8805 should be adopted at least into the IETF stream and
> >>> possibly to the standards-track as well...
> >>
> >> and it could use a bit of work
I don't have particular feelings on the last sentence. It's true that
those characters don't seem to be prohibited, but it's probably still true
that we don't expect to see them.
Other than that, this looks fine.
-Ben
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 03:43:04PM -0400, Russ Housley wrote:
> I guess the
Ben:
text. Trailing space characters MUST NOT appear on a line of text.
That is, the space or tab characters must not be followed by the
sequence. [...]
Is the restriction on Unicode characters of category "space separator"
("space characters") or the two
>>> Publishing this document on the stanards-track does make one wonder
>>> whether RFC 8805 should be adopted at least into the IETF stream and
>>> possibly to the standards-track as well...
>>
>> and it could use a bit of work in the process. can you say "let's open
>> a can of worms?" but yes
I guess the last sentence should go away too. RFC 8805 does not prohibit them,
but I cannot imagine them as helpful.
Russ
> On May 21, 2021, at 3:39 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> so
>
> The canonicalization procedure converts the data from its internal
> character representation to the UTF-8
so
The canonicalization procedure converts the data from its internal
character representation to the UTF-8 [RFC3629] character encoding,
and the sequence MUST be used to denote the end of a line of
text. A blank line is represented solely by the sequence.
Other non-printable cha
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 09:13:52AM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
> Russ wrote:
> > Responding to Part 1 of your DISCUSS and a few of your comments. My
> > co-authors will address the other parts, including the NITS.
>
> turning attention to this now. i was in the RIPE meetings getting this
> through
I'll try to respond to the thread in reverse order to avoid duplication...
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 03:11:51PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
> ok, let me try to cover what russ has not. good reviews are much
> appreciated
>
> [ in the cs academic social circle, there has been comment that,
> tho
ok, let me try to cover what russ has not. good reviews are much
appreciated
[ in the cs academic social circle, there has been comment that,
though reviews can be a pita, they are substantial revwiews. one
gets useful feedback. in man other fields, one gets one or two
sentences s
> Responding to Part 1 of your DISCUSS and a few of your comments. My
> co-authors will address the other parts, including the NITS.
turning attention to this now. i was in the RIPE meetings getting this
through their sausage machine.
> OLD:
>
>1. Obtain the signer's certificate from an R
Ben:
Responding to Part 1 of your DISCUSS and a few of your comments. My co-authors
will address the other parts, including the NITS.
> --
> DISCUSS:
> --
>
>
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds-12: 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
22 matches
Mail list logo
