+1

It should at the very least offer RFC 6505 as another alternative to RFC 4552 
(which anyways has few implementations).

Cheers, Manav

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
> On Behalf Of Merike Kaeo
> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 10:54 PM
> To: Fernando Gont
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [OPSEC] Liaison from SG17 on IPv6 Security Guideline
> 
> 
> 
> On May 20, 2013, at 6:45 PM, Fernando Gont 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > On 05/03/2013 02:08 PM, Scott Mansfield wrote:
> >> The ITU-T SG17 (Security) has provided a copy of the 
> latest version 
> >> of the draft Recommendation ITU-T X.ipv6-secguide 
> "Technical security 
> >> guideline on deploying IPv6".
> >> 
> >> There is no action requested, the liaison is for information.
> >> 
> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1246/
> > 
> > Dumb question:
> > 
> > Are we expected/allowed to contribute to the corresponding 
> document? 
> > If so, how should such contributions happen? (i.e., where should 
> > contributions be sent to or discussed at?).
> > 
> I have same question since have some edits (recommendations 
> for edits).
> 
> - merike
> 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > --
> > Fernando Gont
> > SI6 Networks
> > e-mail: [email protected]
> > PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > OPSEC mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> OPSEC mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
> 
_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec

Reply via email to