Hi Tom,
would it be possible for you to augment your first comment with change
proposals, if possible?
@authors: it seems to me that the references issues Tom now provided in
specific detail could be resolved in this thread in a timely manner. Is
that correct?
Viele GrΓΌΓe,
Henk
On 12.10.22 13:39, tom petch wrote:
From: OPSAWG <[email protected]> on behalf of Henk Birkholz
<[email protected]>
Sent: 06 October 2022 13:26
Dear authors and contributors,
thank you for your hard work. As it seems that all existing issues have
been resolve, we'll move the I-D to write-up in the datatracker.
Also, thanks Thomas Fossati for stepping up as shepherd!
<tp>
My main comment on this remains the mix of two different YANG modules with
different life cycles; I expect that l will comment again on the Last Call list
to give this issue more exposure.
Of lesser import, I cannot make sense of the references.
I see [RFC5246] which normally means that a reference has been created. Not
here, so there would seem to have been some chicanery involved, that this I-D
has not been produced by the usual IETF tools.
I also see RFC5869, RFC6346, RFC8447 which seem absent from the I-D References.
dtls13 is now an RFC.
What is the difference between
draft-ietf-tls-dtls13:
and
"RFC DDDD: Datagram Transport Layer Security 1.3";
?
How do I find
"RFC CCCC: Common YANG Data Types for Cryptography";
or
"RFC IIII: Common YANG Data Types for Hash algorithms"; ?
Does tls-1-2 mean the same as tls-1.2? And is this the same as that which the Netconf WG refers to as tls12?
Tom Petch
For the OPSAWG co-chairs,
Henk
On 29.09.22 10:27, Henk Birkholz wrote:
Dear OPSAWG members,
this email concludes the first WGLC call for
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-tls-07.html.
A few comments where raised. Authors/editors, please go ahead and
address these as discussed on the list.
For the OPSAWG co-chairs,
Henk
On 14.09.22 16:07, Henk Birkholz wrote:
Dear OPSAWG members,
this email starts a two week period for a Working Group Last Call of
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-tls-07.html
ending on Thursday, September 28th.
The authors believe the Internet-Draft is ready for a WGLC and the
chairs agree. The draft has been discussed visibly at IETF 114 and
review feedback has been incorporated in -07.
Please send your comments to the list and your assessment of whether
or not it is ready to proceed to publication before September 28th.
For the OPSAWG co-chairs,
Henk
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
