s.1 the usage of /well-know/well-known/ mechanisms s.3.6 In case the initial TLS negotiation or the peer identity check /fail/fails/
More seriously, the world has a pesky habit of moving on; the fact that one of the references is an I-D from 2014 sort of tells the tale. The UTA working group have worked over the idea of how to start TLS and RFC7525, RFC7672 and RFC7457 may now be relevant while draft-elie-nntp-tls-recommendations-03 is the most recent working over of that territory that I know of and I would regard that as the current standard. For example, he tackles the terminology of strict v implicit v mandatory TLS, which the RFC have muddied the waters on. So, ready for the IESG in 2015, now I am less clear. Tom Petch ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dhruv Dhody" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 4:32 AM Subject: Re: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-pceps-11.txt > Hi WG, Chairs, > > We have updated the version to avoid expiry. > > The document was moved to the standards track 6 months back during the > Berlin meeting. There have been no issues raised. > The document was WG last called and now awaits shepherd review and > write-up. There are no dependencies on other document and can be moved to > the IESG. > > Happy 2017! > > Regards, > Dhruv > > > > On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 9:43 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > > directories. > > This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element of the IETF. > > > > Title : Secure Transport for PCEP > > Authors : Diego R. Lopez > > Oscar Gonzalez de Dios > > Qin Wu > > Dhruv Dhody > > Filename : draft-ietf-pce-pceps-11.txt > > Pages : 18 > > Date : 2017-01-02 > > > > Abstract: > > The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) defines > > the mechanisms for the communication between a Path Computation > > Client (PCC) and a Path Computation Element (PCE), or among PCEs. > > This document describe the usage of Transport Layer Security (TLS) to > > enhance PCEP security, hence the PCEPS acronym proposed for it. The > > additional security mechanisms are provided by the transport protocol > > supporting PCEP, and therefore they do not affect the flexibility and > > extensibility of PCEP. > > > > This document updates RFC 5440 regarding the PCEP initialization > > phase specification. > > > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-pceps/ > > > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-11 > > > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-pceps-11 > > > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > >> _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce > _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
