Hi,
(Top post)
I agree that the new wording is clearer.

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017, at 01:28 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:
> Hi, Dhruv,
> 
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 6:08 AM, Dhruv Dhody
> <dhruv.dh...@huawei.com> wrote:>> Hi Spencer, ____


>> __ __


>> *From:* Spencer Dawkins at IETF
>> [mailto:spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com] *Sent:* 07 August 2017 21:17
>> *To:* Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dh...@huawei.com> *Cc:* Alexey Melnikov
>> <aamelni...@fastmail.fm>; cmarga...@juniper.net; draft-ietf-pce-
>> pc...@ietf.org; pce@ietf.org; The IESG <i...@ietf.org>; pce-
>> cha...@ietf.org *Subject:* Re: [Pce] Alexey Melnikov's Yes on 
>> draft-ietf-pce-pceps-
>> 15: (with COMMENT)____>> __ __


>> Hi, Dhruv,____


>> __ __


>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dh...@huawei.com>
>> wrote:____>>> Hi Spencer, Alexey,____


>>>  ____


>>> The text refers to the Error itself. ____


>>>  ____


>>>    If a PCEP speaker that is unwilling or unable to negotiate
>>>    TLS____>>>    receives a StartTLS messages, it MUST return a PCErr 
>>> message
>>>    (in____>>>    clear) with Error-Type set to [TBA2 by IANA] (PCEP StartTLS
>>>    failure)____>>>    and Error-value set to:____


>>>  ____


>>>    o  3 (not without TLS) if it is not willing to exchange PCEP
>>>    messages____>>>       without the solicited TLS connection, and it MUST 
>>> close the
>>>       TCP____>>>       session.____


>>>  ____


>>> I can see how it could be misleading and I have corrected it to
>>> – ____>>>  ____


>>>                   +-+-+                 +-+-+____


>>>                   |PCC|                 |PCE|____


>>>                   +-+-+                 +-+-+____


>>>                     |                     |____


>>>                     | StartTLS            |____


>>>                     | msg                 | PCE waits____


>>>                     |-------------------->| for PCC____


>>>                     |               PCErr |____


>>>                     |<--------------------| Send Error____


>>>                     |                     | Type=TBA2,Value=3____>>>        
>>>              |                     | (not without TLS)____>>>               
>>>       |<--------------------|____


>>>                     |       Close         |____


>>>  ____


>>>  ____


>>>  ____


>>>    Figure 5: Both PCEP Speaker supports PCEPS as well as without
>>>    PCEPS,____>>>                    but PCE cannot start TLS negotiation____


>> __ __


>> This is still Alexey's ballot, of course, but ...____


>> __ __


>> I like the change you're making, but the part that confused me is
>> that in English, multiple negatives don't work well - so, "not
>> without TLS" simplifies to "with TLS" in common usage.____>> __ __


>> Are you using "not without TLS" to mean "TLS usage required", or
>> something like that?____>> __ __


>> Spencer ____


>> **[[Dhruv Dhody]] Yes, it means **"TLS usage required".  **I can
>> reword it to the text we have in the IANA section –**> 
> Thanks! I know what that means.
> 
> Spencer
>  
>> **____**


>> **__ __**


>>    Error-____


>>    Type    Meaning               Error-value
>>    Reference____>> __ __


>>                                  3:Failure, connection   This
>>                                    document____>>                            
>>       without TLS not____


>>                                  possible____


>>                                  4:Failure, connection   This
>>                                    document____>>                            
>>        without TLS possible____


>> __ __


>> **Regards,____**


>> **Dhruv____**


>>>  ____


>>> Regards,____


>>> Dhruv____


>>>  ____


>>> *From:* Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Spencer
>>> Dawkins at IETF *Sent:* 07 August 2017 19:16 *To:* Alexey Melnikov
>>> <aamelni...@fastmail.fm> *Cc:* cmarga...@juniper.net; draft-ietf-pce-
>>> pc...@ietf.org; pce@ietf.org; The IESG <i...@ietf.org>; pce-
>>> cha...@ietf.org *Subject:* Re: [Pce] Alexey Melnikov's Yes on 
>>> draft-ietf-pce-pceps-
>>> 15: (with COMMENT)____>>>  ____


>>> This is Alexey's ballot, but ...____


>>>  ____


>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 5:48 AM, Alexey Melnikov
>>> <aamelni...@fastmail.fm> wrote:____>>>> One more little thing:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  In figure 5, I see: Send Error (not without TLS)
>>>>
>>>>  What does "not without TLS" mean? I think the figure is sending
>>>>  PCErr in the clear (without TLS)____>>>  ____


>>> This text wasn't clear to me, either.____


>>>  ____


>>> Thanks for actually mentioning this in your ballot, Alexey.____


>>>  ____


>>> Spencer____


>>>  ____


>>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017, at 11:46 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>>>  > Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
>>>>  > draft-ietf-pce-pceps-15: Yes
>>>>   (snip)____>>>> > I think the text about use of RFC 6125 should use RFC 
>>>> 6125
>>>> > terminology
>>>>  > like DNS-ID and CN-ID, because they have a bit more semantics
>>>>  > associated with them other than just subjectAltName:DNS. I think
>>>>  > you should also clarify whether you want to allow wildcards in
>>>>  > DNS-ID/CN-ID (RFC 6125 talks about that).
>>>>  >
>>>>  >____>>>  ____


>> __ __



_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Reply via email to