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 > <[email protected]> wrote:>> Hi Spencer, ____
>> __ __ >> *From:* Spencer Dawkins at IETF >> [mailto:[email protected]] *Sent:* 07 August 2017 21:17 >> *To:* Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]> *Cc:* Alexey Melnikov >> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; draft-ietf-pce- >> [email protected]; [email protected]; The IESG <[email protected]>; pce- >> [email protected] *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 <[email protected]> >> 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:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Spencer >>> Dawkins at IETF *Sent:* 07 August 2017 19:16 *To:* Alexey Melnikov >>> <[email protected]> *Cc:* [email protected]; draft-ietf-pce- >>> [email protected]; [email protected]; The IESG <[email protected]>; pce- >>> [email protected] *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 >>> <[email protected]> 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 [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
