Hi Murray, On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 11:30 AM Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker < [email protected]> wrote:
> Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-03: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to > https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ > for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Further to Eric's comment, I'm completely confused by question #4 of the > shepherd writeup. While the document claims there are no implementations > known, the shepherd writeup says there's at least one (and it was easy), > and > makes another "Yes" remark that I don't understand. > > > Dhruv: The shepherd writeup mentions this email response on the mailing list - https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/dLdcUan2psssBUgzCtXPluEr_ok/ that mentions some implementation experience. When we asked to include that information in the implementation section we did not get a confirmation back. Soo that's that :) We could update the implementation section to say - OLD: At the time of posting the -02 version of this document, there are no known implementations of this mechanism. NEW: At the time of posting the -04 version of this document, there are no known implementations of this mechanism. It is believed that one vendor has implementation, but these plans are too vague to make any further assertions. END Thanks! Dhruv
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
