On Wed, 22 Jun 2016, Waltermire, David A. (Fed) wrote:
At IETF 95 the chairs took an action to issue a call for adoption on draft-fluhrer-qr-ikev2-01 based on WG interest in the concept described by the draft. This call is long overdue. This is the official call for adoption of https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fluhrer-qr-ikev2/ as an IPSecME working group (WG) document.
I still don't know if we should adopt this document or https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nagayama-ipsecme-ipsec-with-qkd-01 The qkd document was rejected for adoption at the time for lack of interest. I would like to better understand why draft-fluhrer-qr-ikev2 would be prefered over draft-nagayama-ipsecme-ipsec-with-qkd. Paul _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
