For information. Only one positive reply from the HIP WG about this change, so, let’s go forward and allow the publication of RFC4423-bis and the NAT traversal.
You may also have noticed that HIP-DEX has been sent back to the WG as 3 IESG evaluations were not enough to clear all the DISCUSS. At the bare minimum, the IESG expects a change in the intended status to ‘experimental’ and more actual/accurate/recent evaluation of the CPU/battery/memory impact of forfeiting forward secrecy. Regards -éric From: Eric Vyncke <[email protected]> Date: Friday, 2 April 2021 at 09:14 To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Cc: Robert Moskowitz <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Gonzalo Camarillo <[email protected]>, Lars Eggert <[email protected]> Subject: Request to change one reference from normative to informative Dear RFC Editor, After consultation with the IESG, the authors, and the HIP WG, I request a change in draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis-20, which is currently in the state MISSREF. The reference to draft-ietf-hip-dex MUST be informative and no longer normative. This change better suits the type of reference and should also move C386 forward. Thank you in advance, Regards -éric
_______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
