Sure. I’m sorry. I made the list based on datatracker, which doesn’t show related drafts for the WG the way the tools page does.
> On 12 Jul 2019, at 2:17, Kathleen Moriarty <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Sent from my mobile device > > On Jul 11, 2019, at 4:56 PM, Owen Friel (ofriel) <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> Could I have 10 mins to cover: >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-friel-acme-integrations-01 >> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-friel-acme-integrations-01> >> >> There is some overlap with >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yusef-acme-3rd-party-device-attestation-01 >> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yusef-acme-3rd-party-device-attestation-01> >> and https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-moriarty-acme-client/ >> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-moriarty-acme-client/> and we are >> having offline discussion with Kathleen and Rifaat on how to align all 3. > > I’d like to present the updated client draft listed above as well. > > There’s an overview draft the may fold in with Owen’s, but we need to figure > that out according to interest. > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moriarty-acme-overview-00 > <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moriarty-acme-overview-00> > > Best regards, > Kathleen > >> >> Thanks, >> Owen >> >> From: Acme <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf >> Of Yoav Nir >> Sent: 11 July 2019 20:50 >> To: IETF ACME <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Subject: [Acme] Agenda for IETF 105 >> >> Hi, all >> >> We are putting together the agenda for IETF 105. >> >> The current plan is to have presentation and agenda time for email and for >> telephony. >> >> There is still time on the agenda to cover more topics, so if you think they >> should be brought up, please reply either to this thread, or directly to >> Rich and me: >> · draft-ietf-acme-tls-alpn seems to be stalled for months. We’ve had >> a change of AD and a new AD review ([1]). Can allocating meeting time help >> with progressing this? >> · draft-ietf-acme-star is in IETF LC with no significant issues >> having come up. Unless the authors think otherwise, I don’t see a need to >> allocate agenda time at this point. >> · draft-ietf-acme-ip is waiting for an AD write-up and to progress >> it. Unless Roland feels differently, I don’t think there’s much to spend >> agenda time on. >> · draft-ietf-acme-caa is in the RFC editor’s queue. So, all good? >> >> If you have some other business for the WG meeting, please bring it up now. >> >> Thanks >> >> Rich & Yoav >> >> >> [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/YW9rho7i1YjLd32k-MDYX4p2dSU >> <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/YW9rho7i1YjLd32k-MDYX4p2dSU>_______________________________________________ >> Acme mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme >> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme>
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
