Hi, The first IESG ballot for the draft-ietf-hip-native-nat-traversal was done in May 2018 and was blocked by a couple of DISCUSS by the 2018 IESG. The main issue IMHO was around “why not reusing plain ICE?”; the authors in discussion with Adam Roach have provided an applicability statement and a justification on why “plain ICE” does not work efficiently when combined with HIP + additional text or replies for the remaining DISCUSS & COMMENT.
The diff are https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-hip-native-nat-traversal-30&url1=draft-ietf-hip-native-nat-traversal-28 I have reviewed all COMMENT and DISCUSS from 2 years ago and it appears to me that they are all addressed (including those from 2018 AD who are no more AD in 2020 – they are in cc). The changes in the document are minor and I am confident that neither a WG Last Call not an IETF Last Call is required. I am therefore placing the document in the next IESG telechat and opening a new IESG ballot. Thank you for the authors on their energy to keep the document useful, Regards, -éric
_______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
