Re: [Int-area] Suggestion to move draft-olteanu-intarea-socks as Independent Submissions

[Vladimir Olteanu]

Hi Eric, Adrian,

We have two security-related changes in the works (as well as a few 
loose ends to wrap up). Our current plan is to submit one more version 
of the draft and solicit some feedback, and then move forward with it.

Thanks,

Vlad

On 3/2/21 2:37 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:

In fact, please contact me at rfc-...@rfc-editor.org 
<mailto:rfc-...@rfc-editor.org> to make sure that any Independent 
Stream business is not lost in my personal inbox.

Thanks,

Adrian

*From:*Int-area <int-area-boun...@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Eric Vyncke 
(evyncke)
*Sent:* 02 March 2021 12:24
*To:* Vladimir Olteanu <vladimir.olte...@cs.pub.ro>; sarik...@ieee.org
*Cc:* int-area@ietf.org; dragos.nicule...@cs.pub.ro
*Subject:* Re: [Int-area] Suggestion to move 
draft-olteanu-intarea-socks as Independent Submissions

Vlad, Dragos,

What are you plan to move forward with this document ? There were some 
recent emails about it, hence my question :-)

Do you intend to follow the Independent Submission stream (ISE) with 
intended experimental status ? If so, please contact Adrian Farrel 
adr...@olddog.co.uk <mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk>

Regards

-éric

*From: *Vladimir Olteanu <vladimir.olte...@cs.pub.ro 
<mailto:vladimir.olte...@cs.pub.ro>>
*Date: *Friday, 15 January 2021 at 17:08
*To: *Eric Vyncke <evyn...@cisco.com <mailto:evyn...@cisco.com>>, 
"sarik...@ieee.org <mailto:sarik...@ieee.org>" <sarik...@ieee.org 
<mailto:sarik...@ieee.org>>
*Cc: *"int-area@ietf.org <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>" 
<int-area@ietf.org <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>>, 
"dragos.nicule...@cs.pub.ro <mailto:dragos.nicule...@cs.pub.ro>" 
<dragos.nicule...@cs.pub.ro <mailto:dragos.nicule...@cs.pub.ro>>
*Subject: *Re: [Int-area] Suggestion to move 
draft-olteanu-intarea-socks as Independent Submissions

Hello,

Yes, I agree that ISE is the sensible path to take.

The intended status was changed from Experimental to Standards Track 
in -11, but Informational is fine for the moment. When/if SOCKSv6 
gains traction, we can issue a bis and change the intended status.

Thanks,

Vlad

On 1/15/21 5:52 PM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:

    Indeed, but as the current intended status is experimental ;-) it
    should not be a problem

    -éric

    *From: *Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2...@gmail.com>
    <mailto:sarikaya2...@gmail.com>
    *Reply-To: *"sarik...@ieee.org" <mailto:sarik...@ieee.org>
    <sarik...@ieee.org> <mailto:sarik...@ieee.org>
    *Date: *Friday, 15 January 2021 at 16:43
    *To: *Eric Vyncke <evyn...@cisco.com> <mailto:evyn...@cisco.com>
    *Cc: *"int-area@ietf.org" <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
    <int-area@ietf.org> <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>,
    "vladimir.olte...@cs.pub.ro" <mailto:vladimir.olte...@cs.pub.ro>
    <vladimir.olte...@cs.pub.ro> <mailto:vladimir.olte...@cs.pub.ro>,
    "dragos.nicule...@cs.pub.ro" <mailto:dragos.nicule...@cs.pub.ro>
    <dragos.nicule...@cs.pub.ro> <mailto:dragos.nicule...@cs.pub.ro>
    *Subject: *Re: [Int-area] Suggestion to move
    draft-olteanu-intarea-socks as Independent Submissions

    Hi Eric,

    I am sure you know, all independent Submission documents can only
    be published as Informational.

    I did not check what status the authors wish to have but it is
    good to mention here.

    Regards,

    Behcet

    On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 7:55 AM Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
    <evyncke=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org
    <mailto:40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:

        Vladimir, Dragos,

        While there was some interest in adopting the SOCKv6 document
        as an INT-AREA WG document, the lukewarm interest and lack of
        reviewer volunteers [1] are preventing the actual adoption of
        this document as a WG document (my AD decision in agreement
        with the chairs). After discussions with the IESG and our
        chairs (Juan Carlos and Wassim in cc), I want to propose to
        the authors an easier way to publish this document as an RFC
        but in the Independent Submissions (ISE) stream rather than in
        the usual IETF stream.

        The simple process is outlined at
        https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/independent/
        
<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1VwxfkUlqi_v4NnCaNQ5FzVjfQE2GUrSvMLOxcSe6Y0M0xMMmMxe7ne-103fsoi52WuYjgzRpy_bw_cky7un2UPCEXhP84Ml0TWgCLUgoaLlDnT4nXtp9dR1xOi3hY6hRiWB52oHxmN79vKZJfF0f-HuUrN_g_sJb5h862O4eySFHPxckCXQEiz3LZBY7UfJW6Cph5sd6rIoHFW8FCYIHeNzCaU5gGvMCvkwoqEazcoFWSpPl5IrZkEy66aUabVqVM80g9Qeq1bOiaS8RVRPApCzxRoj-Cf3bSCz2VMAzEBs/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fabout%2Findependent%2F>
        and “ISE” is described in RFC 4846.

        This should allow this document to move forward and be
        published as a RFC.

        Hope this helps

        -éric (with JC & Wassim)

        [1] I tried to contact the previous AFT WG proponents, SOCKS
        authors, and some open source SOCKS implementors without any
        reply on this topic.

        _______________________________________________
        Int-area mailing list
        Int-area@ietf.org <mailto:Int-area@ietf.org>
        https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
        
<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1KB2NleJna66sVXsBDPV9nLQtvvS28j0c8kNZIsOvATOEJLXZsmjyrjSI_NkC6TAIIwhpdbUYJsH72kqcaczlHMkLF-lQXAPKQrrHjoC-Ioxca4cChkf69I41fycQP1Z2SXB6mDCHsZM1qNWLh-eYJdQZE2xEJtDfrF2Za447DuD85VMBbAkYH6zZA6eQaQZB0WlSmePeJi_jxkMLt0jFH_7hAszbaGiRVXAvmD1xdkH5J7U9cuWOBFAxXCBSqev-bfhZvqU7nbqTMPJiTWPY8-mx1et1rXQzLKpxrFy3dis/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fint-area>

_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
Int-area@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area