pared to RFC 9370
> alone).
The current Security Consideration section is mostly a stub.
I agree that more considerations should be added there.
Thank you for the concrete proposals.
Regards,
Valery.
> - Rebecca
>
> Rebecca Guthrie
> she/her
> Center for Cybersecurity Standar
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 7:12 AM Vukašin Karadžić
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I agree with Rebecca's suggestion. Especially the first one, regarding
> introducing the USE_EARLY_PPK notify, since it seems the introduction would
> also make the implementation of the draft (combined with RFC 8784)
>
ect: Re: [IPsec] New Version Notification for
> draft-smyslov-ipsecme-ikev2-qr-alt-07.txt
> Message-ID:
> <
> ph8pr09mb92945faff119de5abfe3601bfc...@ph8pr09mb9294.namprd09.prod.outlook.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
WG
Cc: ipsec-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [IPsec] New Version Notification for
draft-smyslov-ipsecme-ikev2-qr-alt-07.txt
Hi,
a new version of the draft has been published.
It addresses issue with mismatched PPKs and also adds some clarifications on
interaction with RFC 8784.
As it was discussed
Hi,
a new version of the draft has been published.
It addresses issue with mismatched PPKs and also adds some clarifications on
interaction with RFC 8784.
As it was discussed at the IETF116 IPSECME meeting,
once the new version is published, a call for adoption would be issued.
Chairs, can
