ds-sec-considerations
They are meant to provide analysis and solutions for this an other
numeric IDs.
FWIW, there's an ongoing call for adoption (please see here:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pearg/YlTn3VlnwFbnJ0IgNLTtLwg6W0c), on
the PEARG list (https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/pearg).
Thanks!
FYI.
The call is here:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pearg/YlTn3VlnwFbnJ0IgNLTtLwg6W0c
Taking place on this list: https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/pearg
Thanks,
Fernando
Forwarded Message
Subject: [Pearg] Call for Adoption: Two drafts on Numeric IDs
Date: Wed,
the TCP stream
(e.g. think about a SSL/TCP-based VPN...)
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
on.
Thanks!
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
to do when the header chain spans multiple
fragments? Are we trying to keep the header chain all within
the first fragment or not?
Yes.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
their keys in a secure way when they have the chance to -- for
instance, why doesn't everyone include their fingerprint on their
personal cards?)
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
--
Fernando Gont
e
- --
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
- --
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
-BEGIN PGP
stuff to
present, etc. So I've set up a very short on-line survey to help us
plan for the meeting.
If you're interested, please take 5 minutes to complete the survey at:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FFL386K
Thanks!
Best regards,
- --
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP
number;
the only way to achieve anything close to it is to have a private jet
(with exceptional range).
Could you please elaborate a bit more on the meaning of the second column?
Thanks!
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4
the spirit of open more than anyone else.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
On 05/27/2013 07:31 AM, Juliao Braga wrote:
According to the news published for a long time in Brazilian newspapers
and magazines, Buenos Aires (a wonderful place!) would not be
recommended.
Recommended for what? And on what basis?
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg
a meeting in
Buenos Aires is a great idea or not.. but just trying to keep the
discussion objective.
Un abrazo,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
you could just have some small amount
of money in pesos (mostly to pay cabs, I'd say), and move around the
city using your credit card (or, if needed, USD or Euros)
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE
should tell us about the true cenary would be our
Argentine friends.
Regards,
Julião
Em 28/05/2013 10:36, Fernando Gont escreveu:
On 05/27/2013 07:31 AM, Juliao Braga wrote:
According to the news published for a long time in Brazilian newspapers
and magazines, Buenos Aires (a wonderful place
on a blog pollutes and
biases the discussion unfairly and inappropriately.
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
, then, when two
interfaces are employed to connect to the same network, you are
guaranteed to get a collision...
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
mentioned above?
Nit:
This link in the [Broersma] reference is broken:
http://www.ipv6.org.au/summit/talks/Ron_Broersma.pdf
Will fix this.
Thanks!
Best regards,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
...)
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
is the same as that in RFC1948.
Thanks!
Best regards,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
regards,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
On 04/22/2013 03:39 PM, SM wrote:
At 12:40 22-04-2013, Fernando Gont wrote:
PLease see the Appendix.
I read that. I was confused by the short title (Stable Privacy
Addresses) at first. I didn't see much discussion in the draft about
privacy considerations.
There's some discussion
a goal f
tis dcument, but rather a byproduct of it.
And I would
observe that the DAD problem cannot be solved ina reliable way.
Could you please elaborate?
Thanks!
Best regards,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55
knows I do my best to address all feedback, no
matter whether that implies re-writing large portions of the document in
question.)
Make the spec as clear as possible save time and energy on all sides.
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint
in this document as giving more room for tradeoffs
to developers than RFC4941, and the same room for tradeoffs as e.g. RFC6528.
Based on the above, me, I don't find the idea of re-writing the I-D
compelling -- particularly at this point in time.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg
... )
Thanks!
Best regards,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
that keeps everyone happy.
Thanks so much!
Best regards,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
On 04/02/2013 10:25 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
On Apr 2, 2013, at 7:30 PM, Fernando Gont fg...@si6networks.com wrote:
I agree with the last sentence. Happy Eyeballs is about the HTTP.
There are other applications protocols too. :-)
Happy eyeballs is about HTTP. But part of the approach predates
, this
is kind of the whitelisting approach that has been applied to the
general case by content providers -- with the caveat that in this case
you positively know that such connectivity is not present).
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484
is about.
This one I cannot do much about. :-)
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
not, and I don't think we're implying that. However, I'd note that
some people are in the position of blocking traffic, or not doing
anything about it. Check for IPv6 support in different security
products, and you might get depressed.
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg
of the box for years
(no matter whether you consider that a problem, or a feature).
FWIW, my TP-LINK router does that, even if I don't want it to.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
at
tools.ietf.org. When needed/appropriate, I've posted a summary of major
changes to the relevant mailing-list.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
] or change it to ...Section 5.2 of
[RFC4443] and documented in [RFC5927]
Thoughts?
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
have in mind... but my personal
experience says that being able to tackle isolated problems separately
(rather than work on a large document that tries to address a plethora
of issues) is (by far) more doable.
Thanks!
Best regards,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP
entries. and that corresponding changes
be made elsewhere in the draft where clean up is used.
I have no problem with applying this change. So unless anyone argues on
the contrary, I'll rev the document accordingly.
Thanks!
Best regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg
at the mike was saying, either because of
low-volume, background noise, or a strong accent I wasn't used to.
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
to post to the mailing-lists?
Or do you count as participants those that write documents and/or send
feedback about documents?
etc..
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
general, allowing any endpoint name format to be used.
Please let me know if you have any suggestions on how to tweak the text
to improve this.
Thanks!
Best regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076
of
existing entries in the neighbor cache, and unable to answer Neighbor
Solicitation).
s/Solicitation/Solicitations/
* Section 7.2:
s/Neighbour/Neighbor/
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E
/2012/01/british_tourist.html
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On 01/05/2012 11:48 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
If protocol corresponds with program or algorithm, then what is the
communications term that corresponds to process?
Protocol Machine. or Protocol Instance.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@si6networks.com
PGP
to the documents
shepard's agreement ;-) )
Thanks!
Best regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https
throughout the document, you shouldn't use it here, either.
i.e., please rephrase.
Thanks!
Best regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
(but currently can't), etc. And, if this is
meant to be v6-only, state why v4 is excluded -- unless we're happy to
have people connect their IPv4-devices, and see that they cannot
communicate anymore.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7
On 06/30/2011 12:56 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
Fernando Gont wrote:
I personally consider this property of end-to-end connectivity as
gone.
How do you think about P2P applications?
I think about applications that would benefit from e2e connectivity, but
since it is gone, they have to spend
like it or not. As
long as they are able to provide that service, I don't find a compelling
reason for them to increase risk through unnecessary increased exposure.
(Yes, in those cases in which you *need* increased exposure, you open
your network -- i.e., default deny)
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e
... but not what I read from this
discussion and the proposed charter.
Thoughts?
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
, as such that is homenet's primary focus.
However, when we can define something that is needed for IPv6 in a
way that is also useful for IPv4 without making significant
concessions, we should go ahead and do so.
- Mark
On Jun 30, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Fernando Gont
devices
can co-exist in whatever v6 home-network architecture we envision).
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
that people will replicate the
architecture of their IPv4 networks with IPv6, in which end-systems are
not reachable from the public Internet.
Thanks!
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
/advanced security RFCs produced by v6ops aimed at
typical home devices?
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https
and disable EPSV to PASV and, if implemented, EPRT to PORT
translation.
Please rephrase to ...disable EPSV to PASV translation and, if
implemented, EPRT to PORT translation.
Thanks!
Best regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7
mentions that
timestamps may be easily predictable. However, this does not need to be
the case (see e.g., draft-gont-timestamps-generation)
Thanks!
Best regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
-- I
just noted the tcp assessment doc for completeness sake.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https
On 02/02/2011 10:08 p.m., Joe Touch wrote:
On 2/2/2011 5:04 PM, Fernando Gont wrote:
...
At the least, it's worth noting that geolocation is already broken by
tunnels, and that IP addressing does not ensure geographic proximity
before attributing breakage on NATs or other sharing.
Tunnels
On 02/02/2011 10:24 p.m., Fernando Gont wrote:
On 2/2/2011 5:04 PM, Fernando Gont wrote:
...
At the least, it's worth noting that geolocation is already broken by
tunnels, and that IP addressing does not ensure geographic proximity
before attributing breakage on NATs or other sharing
, and if multiple layers of NAT will break
it (or, will prevent it to work the way it used to, if you prefer), it
should be noted.
The fact that geo-location was not considered in the IP design, is
irrelevant. As noted, IP wasn't meant for production, either.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna
this one?
Thanks!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
with widespread deployment of
IPsec was NAT traversal, why didn't we see widespread IPsec deployment
(for the general case) e.g. once RFC 3948 was published?
And: Do you expect IPsec deplyment to increase dramatically as IPv6 gets
deployed?
Thanks!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna
of the many needed
tools make IPv6 different than IPv4, especially given that the
indicated tool is present in both IPv4 and IPv6 implementations?
Scratch-a-my-head. I don't see it.
Nor do I ;-)
Thanks!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP
will be running both IPv4 and IPv6 for lots of years,
the complexity of IPv6 adds to that of IPv4.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf
, the
user at that IP address is authorized to print.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org
,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
in an ICMP frag needed is below some specified
threshols. This RFC2402-behavior could cause problems in this scenario, too.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
argue that since there's no way of notifying the other
end how you're interpreting the UP, trying to change this would actually
break the current working code.
Thanks!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE
give them careful consideration.
Fair enough.
Thanks!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https
experience with getting Canadian visas (I have got four or
five), from Buenos Aires (Argentina), being an Argentinian citizen.
Europe is much better in this respect. For instance, they don't require
visas for many latin-american countries (including Argentina).
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail
. ;-)
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
At the time email was a special case because it was the *only* application.
As far as I recall *reading* (I wasn't around at the time :-) ) email
was a couple of FTP commands? -- I seem to recall John Day writing about
this in his book..
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e
throwing cryptography at packets.
Agreed. The work that we have done at CPNI on TCP IP is probably along
those lines (i.e., more than throwing crypto) -- see
http://www.gont.com.ar/papers
Thanks!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5
is usually valuable
information, too. It wouldn't be surprised if the taxi driver tried to
charge you more than he should if he realized you have no idea of how
much things cost there (this could easily happen here in Argentina).
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP
people are actually *concerned* about
this. (no, not *me*)
IPv6 also make IPsec mandatory, which seems a significant change over
IPv4, too.
As noted by Fred, this is mostly words on paper.
Thanks!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint
.
Regarding the LOI itself, they usually accept LOIs in electronic form...
so I guess this is probably the case for the Chinese visa, too.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
to get their visas (said they had never live in the US
illegally, when they actually had).
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing
of of 2, such as 64 or 128). This,
together with the fact that the TTL is assumed to be a hop limit (rather
than a time count) might leave some room for using a different upper
limit for the RTO (and hence the persist timer).
Thanks!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar
for attending meetings.
Just my two cents
Thanks!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https
not).
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Hoenes) who provided very thorough reviews that had a very
positive impact on the resulting documents.
Thanks again,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
. But as with the previous one,
I'd like to hear what Lars thinks about this one.
(5) General
A few editorial nits will be reported to the authors off-list ASAP.
Looking forward to them!
Thanks!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5
.
---
Wes Eddy
Network Systems Architect
Verizon FNS / NASA GRC
Office: (216) 433-6682
---
___
tcpm mailing list
t...@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg
name is not in the cover page is
simply that that is not the format with which CPNI are published. But I
thought that my authorship of the CPNI document was implicit.
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF
that
the vendor community is looking for guidance here, and I do believe the
IETF should give it.
This is the reason for which the output of the CPNI project was
submitted as an IETF I-D.
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9
!
Kind regards,
Fernando Gont
Original Message
Subject: draft-gont-tcp-security
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 09:19:43 -0500
From: Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-RCN0)[Verizon] wesley.m.e...@nasa.gov
To: t...@ietf.org t...@ietf.org
CC: Fernando Gont ferna...@gont.com.ar, Joe Abley
jab
with deploying it in the current Internet
If tcpm agreed that opsec will be a better venue for this document, I'll
be glad to pursue this effort there. At this point, tcpm and opsec are
two possible options, with no preference for any of the two.
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna
might argue).
Thanks!
Kind regards,
Fernando Gont
The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the TCP Maintenance and Minor
Extensions WG (tcpm) to consider the following document:
- 'Improving TCP's Robustness to Blind In-Window Attacks '
draft-ietf-tcpm-tcpsecure-11.txt
no hidden motivation in
all this.
Honestly, I'm not sure why you always have to knock down others' efforts
on a by default basis, and prejudge the motivation behind those efforts.
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945
for the possible politically-incorrect comments. But
this is the best trade-off I have been able to get between being
politically-correct and being honest.
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
Assessment of the Transmission
Control Protocol (TCP) (draft-gont-tcp-security-00.txt) and is
available at: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-gont-tcp-security-00.txt
Any comments will be more than welcome.
Thanks!
Kind regards,
- --
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@acm.org
PGP
involved in the
process.
I'd be glad to discuss a plan to pursue this work within the IETF.
Thanks!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando at gont.com.ar || fgont at acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
to add text back to the I-D.
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] || [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
, not a technical one. I would still prefer
to see this changed.
Ok. I have applied the proposed change.
Please let me know if there are any remaining issues in the document.
Thanks so much!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] || [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5
At 07:04 p.m. 18/11/2008, Nicholas Weaver wrote:
I would bet (but have no evidence) that the visa problem is almost
specifically a chinese issue.
It is NOT a chinese issue. I have got my USA visa, but it IS an issue
to get it.
Fernando Gont (from Argentina)
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: [EMAIL
Working Group).
Fixed!
Please let me know if the above address your comments
Thanks so much!
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] || [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
93 matches
Mail list logo
