Hi,
On 04/13/2015 04:17 PM, Miika Komu wrote:
Hi,
On 04/01/2015 01:39 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
On Mar 31, 2015, at 3:15 PM, Terry Manderson
<[email protected]> wrote:
Agreed that there is a misspelling/typographical error here, I don't
think
that this would cause an implementation issue in the HIP architecture.
Marking this as "hold for document update".
Exactly right.
It's trivial, but we just verified errata for it in another RFC, so I
thought for completeness...
I submitted a new version of draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis that fixes this,
but it got stuck in tool because the affiliations of all the authors
have changed and I could not verify the submission. I have contacted the
secretariat to resolve this somehow manually.
uploaded two versions that fix the mentioned issue:
version 10:
* fixed the RSA typo (the editorial errata reported)
* updated references to base and esp specifications
* added a reference to orchid specification in the text
* changed my affiliation
version 11:
* changed Robert's affiliation (sorry, missed this in the first upload)
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?difftype=--hwdiff&url2=draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis-10.txt
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?difftype=--hwdiff&url2=draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis-11.txt
_______________________________________________
Hipsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
