Hi Deb, On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 1:03 AM Deb Cooley <[email protected]> wrote:
> with [dc] in front... > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 1:28 AM Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Deb, >> >> On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 5:13 AM Deb Cooley via Datatracker < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Deb Cooley has entered the following ballot position for >>> draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-vendor-12: 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-stateful-pce-vendor/ >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> COMMENT: >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Section 7, para 2: The last () is a bit puzzling. Is there something >>> specific >>> that is anticipated? It might need some explanation. RFC8253 is old >>> enough >>> that TLS1.3 wasn't published yet, but RFC 9325 obviously covers both TLS >>> 1.2 >>> and 1.3. >>> >>> >> Dhruv: As clarified to John [ >> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/1iIo5KlwH6pEIEsgEwa84Jztr7Q/], >> we have been sticking to this text that had an agreement with past Sec ADs >> :) >> >> [dc] obviously that 'agreement' wasn't in place for RFC 8553... I'd like > a pointer to that agreement. > > Dhruv: This text first appeared back in RFC 8623 - https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8623.html#section-12 and after this DISCUSS - https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/bCwTmY59kteSxUvjUo4yTmkFM2o/ and at that time it used to point to RFC7525. RFC 9325 obsoleted RFC7525. If after publication of RFC 9325, we should not be using "unless explicitly set aside in [RFC8253]", then authors can remove it. Thanks! Dhruv
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
