Re: [sidr] AD Review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-ops-10

Randy: Hi! Do you think we can get an update out for this document soon? I just put the BGPsec spec up for the Jan/5 IESG Telechat, and it would be great if we could get this document in as well. Thanks! Alvaro. On 11/8/16, 12:28 AM, "Randy Bush" >

Re: [sidr] AD Review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-18

Just noticed one more thing: the reference to I-D.ietf-sidr-rtr-keying is no longer needed. Thanks! Alvaro. On 12/1/16, 9:10 PM, "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" > wrote: On 11/27/16, 12:21 PM, "Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)"

Re: [sidr] AD Review of draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-18

On 11/27/16, 12:21 PM, "Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)" wrote: Sriram: Hi! Thanks for addressing my comments. I have some remaining comments below. I flagged a couple of items that I think the Chairs should consult the WG on, but I’ll leave it up to them to

Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz

draft-ietf-sidr-rtr-keying >> i thought this was done > this one maybe done, but has not hit WGLC. we can do that here, or > there... I'm agnostic at this point. this is protocol, not ops randy ___ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org

Re: [sidr] Current document status && directionz

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:51 AM, Declan Ma wrote: > Chris, > > I would like to take this thread to request for comments on how to move on > SLURM. > > During the Seoul meeting, Tim suggested moving it to SIDROPS since SIDR is > being closed. > > Yet I had the impression that the AD