Likewise on draft-ietf-uta-ciphersuites-in-sec-syslog, it seems like we are getting enough of what we need out of email to not warrant a session for it.
Cheers, spt > On Sep 21, 2022, at 16:12, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 9/21/22 8:12 AM, Valery Smyslov wrote: >> Hi all, >> the chairs are unsure whether to request a session for UTA at IETF 115. >> It seems to us that the current active WG documents are on the track >> (with little discussions recently) and no new work was suggested. > > With regard to 6125bis: thanks to a pull request from Martin Thomson [1] > we've been making progress on text that will add checking for IP addresses > (as agreed at IETF 114). I expect that we'll be able to submit an updated I-D > in the next few weeks and that we can discuss these changes on list. Right > now I don't think this will require meeting time at IETF 115, so I wouldn't > suggest that we request a session only for this topic. > > Peter > > [1] https://github.com/richsalz/draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis/pull/54 > > > _______________________________________________ > Uta mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta _______________________________________________ Uta mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
