On Mon, 22 Jan 2018, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote:
Subject: [IPsec] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipsecme-split-dns-04.txt
A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ipsecme-split-dns-04
This version addresses the two points raised by Paul
Paul Wouters writes:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2018, Tero Kivinen wrote:
>
> [ added i...@ietf.org to get a general discussion on this, as it seems
> this is a procedural issue not specific to the WG ]
You are trying to follow wrong procedure. There is NO early
allocations for expert review registries.
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the IP Security Maintenance and Extensions WG of
the IETF.
Title : Split DNS Configuration for IKEv2
Authors : Tommy Pauly
On Jan 22, 2018, at 8:45 AM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> I'm trying not to define any DNS terms in this document and stay out of
> any character/domain/hostname discussion. How about:
>
> The content of INTERNAL_DNS_DOMAIN and INTERNAL_DNSSEC_TA may be passed
> to another
Hi Paul,
Expert review requests don’t generally need early assignment because the expert
can review a request immediately and codepoints can be assigned.
The working group chairs normally send the requests to i...@iana.org for early
allocation. See point 5 in section 3.1:
5. If the Area
On Sun, 21 Jan 2018, Paul Hoffman wrote:
So how about:
The content of INTERNAL_DNS_DOMAIN and INTERNAL_DNSSEC_TA
may be
passed to another (DNS) program for processing. The content MUST be
verified to not contain any malicious characters, before it is
passed
On Mon, 22 Jan 2018, Tero Kivinen wrote:
[ added i...@ietf.org to get a general discussion on this, as it seems
this is a procedural issue not specific to the WG ]
execsum: I followed RFC 7120 to get an Early Code Point, and there is
confusion about the process between me, the chairs and the
Paul Wouters writes:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2018, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>
> > Greetings. This document is still listed as in WG Last Call, although I
> > haven't seen anything in the archive about that Last Call closing.
>
> Yeah, the WGLC ended Nov 9. I have pinged the chairs a few times
> already,
Paul and Paul,
Thanks for the additional review and dialog. I am currently reviewing this
document as the shepherd. It would be good to resolve these issues before
moving the draft forward.
I will watch this thread for a resolution before submitting the shepherd
writeup.
Thanks,
Dave
>