I would like to see draft-hmac proceed, pretty much as is. I find draft-hartman more complex to follow with its elements of procedure.
draft-hmac is a delta to the existing USM which is what it it intending to be; you need to understand USM in order to implement it, in which case, all you need is in draft-hmac. draft-hartman contains additional information that seems extraneous and likely to confuse. Tom Petch ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Reid" <[email protected]> To: "Warren Kumari" <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 8:49 PM Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for Adoption: draft-hmac-sha-2-usm-snmp > There was a fair amount of working group discussion around > draft-hmac-sha-2-usm-snmp. That feedback was incorporated > into the latest version of the draft (things like adding a MIB > module, deciding how many and which hmac authentication protocols > to use, what descriptor names to use, mac truncation, etc). > It is important that we not lose that collective input. For > that reason, I prefer draft-hmac-sha-2-usm-snmp as the starting > point. I think it is already pretty close to what we want. > > I would like to see this move quickly since there is market demand now. > > -David Reid > > > Hi all, > > > > Scott and I just chatted about this. > > We see that there is interest in this topic, we think it is an > > important topic, and we would like to adopt /a/ document that > > addresses this. > > > > We'd appreciate it if the authors of draft-hmac-sha-2-usm-snmp and > > draft-hartman-snmp-sha2 can discuss how to move forward, possibly by > > combining the documents into one, or selecting one and folding in > > comments from the other. > > > > Again, we think that this is an important topic, and would like to get > > the best possible document adopted. > > > > Warren and Scott. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Warren Kumari <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Dear OpsAWG WG, > > > > > > This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-hmac-sha-2-usm-snmp. > > > > > > The draft is available here: > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hmac-sha-2-usm-snmp/ > > > > > > Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for > > > adoption by OpsAWG, > > > and comments to the list, clearly stating your view. > > > > > > Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc. > > > > > > This call for adoption ends Mon 25-Aug-2014. > > > > > > In addition, to satisfy RFC 6702 ("Promoting Compliance with > > > Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)"): > > > If you are personally aware of any IPR that applies to > > > draft-hmac-sha-2-usm-snmp, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance > > > with IETF IPR rules? (See RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669, and 5378 for more > > > details.) > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Warren Kumari > > > (as OpsAWG WG co-chair) > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
