y 06, 2017 4:01 PM
To: p...@nohats.ca<mailto:p...@nohats.ca>
Cc: ipsec@ietf.org<mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc4307bis
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Paul Wouters
<p...@nohats.ca<mailto:p...@nohats.ca>> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jan 2017
:* Friday, January 06, 2017 4:01 PM
> *To:* p...@nohats.ca
> *Cc:* ipsec@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc4307bis
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 J
starting ASAP this week. Can you
hold 4307bis for a bit to have the two run concurrently?
Thanks,
Dave
From: IPsec [mailto:ipsec-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kathleen Moriarty
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 4:01 PM
To: p...@nohats.ca
Cc: ipsec@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jan 2017, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
>
> I never got an answer as to whether or not I should wait on the last call,
>> so I pushed it through. No comments
>> came in during the holiday period. Should last call be
On Fri, 6 Jan 2017, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
I never got an answer as to whether or not I should wait on the last call, so I
pushed it through. No comments
came in during the holiday period. Should last call be extended? Or does the
WG feel the reason was because the
document is ready? If
Hello,
I never got an answer as to whether or not I should wait on the last call,
so I pushed it through. No comments came in during the holiday period.
Should last call be extended? Or does the WG feel the reason was because
the document is ready? If the latter then I'll get it ready for an
Hi Paul,
Thanks for your response and sorry for my delayed response.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Dec 2016, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
>
> Hello,
>> Thanks for your work on draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc4307bis. I reviewed the
>> draft and just have a
On Fri, 9 Dec 2016, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
Hello,
Thanks for your work on draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc4307bis. I reviewed the draft
and just have a few questions, the first is a nit.
Nit:
In the second paragraph of 1.3, you can drop the last two words of this
sentence as they are redundant:
Hello,
Thanks for your work on draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc4307bis. I reviewed the
draft and just have a few questions, the first is a nit.
Nit:
In the second paragraph of 1.3, you can drop the last two words of this
sentence as they are redundant:
This document does not give any recommendations