The document is absolutely necessary to complete the full-feature security model that the LISP architecture needs. There are multiple implementations of it and it is ready to advance and has been in that state, IMO, for a long time.
So I support moving it along the process. Dino > On Dec 2, 2016, at 8:50 AM, Luigi Iannone <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi All, > > feedback for this last call has been quite low. For this reason we decide to > extend the last call for another two weeks, ending December 16th. > > Please state your opinion on whether this document is ready for publication. > > Silence is NOT consensus. > > Ciao > > Luigi & Joel > >> On 17 Nov 2016, at 09:36, Luigi Iannone <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> The authors of the LISP-Security (LISP-SEC) document >> [https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lisp-sec/] asked for WG Last >> Call. >> >> This email starts the usual two weeks WG Last Call, to end December 1st, >> 2016. >> >> Please review this WG document and let the WG know if you agree that it is >> ready for handing to the AD. >> If you have objections, please state your reasons why, and explain what it >> would take to address your concerns. >> >> Thanks >> >> Luigi & Joel > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
