Re: [Hipsec] Future of draft-ietf-hip-dex
All, I would be fine with experimental status, especially considering the recent discussions. @Bob: This leaves the final decision up to you. Best regards, René -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Miika Komu Gesendet: Dienstag, 29. Juni 2021 12:25 An: René Hummen ; Gonzalo Camarillo ; r...@htt-consult.com; evyn...@cisco.com Cc: hipsec@ietf.org Betreff: [EXTERNAL] Re: Future of draft-ietf-hip-dex External Message:Use caution before opening links or attachments Hi, for what it's worth, I would ok with experimental status due to lack of PFS but I believe Robert would disagree. ti, 2021-06-29 kello 07:19 +, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) kirjoitti: > I meant experimental and not informational (sorry about any > confusion) > > -éric > > -Original Message- > From: Miika Komu > Date: Tuesday, 29 June 2021 at 09:10 > To: "r...@htt-consult.com" , " > rene.hum...@belden.com" , Gonzalo Camarillo < > gonzalo.camari...@ericsson.com>, Eric Vyncke > Cc: "hipsec@ietf.org" > Subject: Re: Future of draft-ietf-hip-dex > > Hi Eric, > > I know Robert is going for standards track but is experimental > track > out of question? Maybe informal is not so good because the draft > specifies an actual protocol. > > Besides this, most of discuss points require Robert's expertise. > > ma, 2021-06-28 kello 13:51 +, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) > kirjoitti: > > In the absence of reaction on draft-ietf-hip-dex being back to > the > > HIP WG, let me explain its current status. > > > > The draft-ietf-hip-dex draft has not been accepted by the IESG > in > > March 2021 and has been sent back to the HIP WG in order to > address > > multiple DISCUSS blocking points raised by the IESG... A change > of > > intended status to 'informal' could also help the publication as > well > > as strong argumentation that DEX is actually required on > constrained > > devices in 2021. > > > > What is the plan of the authors and of the HIP WG on this topic > ? > > Declaring the I-D dead is also possible of course. But, the I-D > > should not stay in the limbo forever. > > > > Regards > > > > -éric > > > > > ** DISCLAIMER: Privileged and/or Confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee of this message, you may not copy, use or deliver this message to anyone. In such event, you should destroy the message and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. It is understood that opinions or conclusions that do not relate to the official business of the company are neither given nor endorsed by the company. Thank You. ___ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
Re: [Hipsec] Future of draft-ietf-hip-dex
Hi, for what it's worth, I would ok with experimental status due to lack of PFS but I believe Robert would disagree. ti, 2021-06-29 kello 07:19 +, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) kirjoitti: > I meant experimental and not informational (sorry about any > confusion) > > -éric > > -Original Message- > From: Miika Komu > Date: Tuesday, 29 June 2021 at 09:10 > To: "r...@htt-consult.com" , " > rene.hum...@belden.com" , Gonzalo Camarillo < > gonzalo.camari...@ericsson.com>, Eric Vyncke > Cc: "hipsec@ietf.org" > Subject: Re: Future of draft-ietf-hip-dex > > Hi Eric, > > I know Robert is going for standards track but is experimental > track > out of question? Maybe informal is not so good because the draft > specifies an actual protocol. > > Besides this, most of discuss points require Robert's expertise. > > ma, 2021-06-28 kello 13:51 +, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) > kirjoitti: > > In the absence of reaction on draft-ietf-hip-dex being back to > the > > HIP WG, let me explain its current status. > > > > The draft-ietf-hip-dex draft has not been accepted by the IESG > in > > March 2021 and has been sent back to the HIP WG in order to > address > > multiple DISCUSS blocking points raised by the IESG... A change > of > > intended status to 'informal' could also help the publication > as well > > as strong argumentation that DEX is actually required on > constrained > > devices in 2021. > > > > What is the plan of the authors and of the HIP WG on this topic > ? > > Declaring the I-D dead is also possible of course. But, the I-D > > should not stay in the limbo forever. > > > > Regards > > > > -éric > > > > > ___ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
Re: [Hipsec] Future of draft-ietf-hip-dex
I meant experimental and not informational (sorry about any confusion) -éric -Original Message- From: Miika Komu Date: Tuesday, 29 June 2021 at 09:10 To: "r...@htt-consult.com" , "rene.hum...@belden.com" , Gonzalo Camarillo , Eric Vyncke Cc: "hipsec@ietf.org" Subject: Re: Future of draft-ietf-hip-dex Hi Eric, I know Robert is going for standards track but is experimental track out of question? Maybe informal is not so good because the draft specifies an actual protocol. Besides this, most of discuss points require Robert's expertise. ma, 2021-06-28 kello 13:51 +, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) kirjoitti: > In the absence of reaction on draft-ietf-hip-dex being back to the > HIP WG, let me explain its current status. > > The draft-ietf-hip-dex draft has not been accepted by the IESG in > March 2021 and has been sent back to the HIP WG in order to address > multiple DISCUSS blocking points raised by the IESG... A change of > intended status to 'informal' could also help the publication as well > as strong argumentation that DEX is actually required on constrained > devices in 2021. > > What is the plan of the authors and of the HIP WG on this topic ? > Declaring the I-D dead is also possible of course. But, the I-D > should not stay in the limbo forever. > > Regards > > -éric > > ___ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
Re: [Hipsec] Future of draft-ietf-hip-dex
Hi Eric, I know Robert is going for standards track but is experimental track out of question? Maybe informal is not so good because the draft specifies an actual protocol. Besides this, most of discuss points require Robert's expertise. ma, 2021-06-28 kello 13:51 +, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) kirjoitti: > In the absence of reaction on draft-ietf-hip-dex being back to the > HIP WG, let me explain its current status. > > The draft-ietf-hip-dex draft has not been accepted by the IESG in > March 2021 and has been sent back to the HIP WG in order to address > multiple DISCUSS blocking points raised by the IESG... A change of > intended status to 'informal' could also help the publication as well > as strong argumentation that DEX is actually required on constrained > devices in 2021. > > What is the plan of the authors and of the HIP WG on this topic ? > Declaring the I-D dead is also possible of course. But, the I-D > should not stay in the limbo forever. > > Regards > > -éric > > ___ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
