> On Apr 25, 2017, at 9:38 PM, Kathleen Moriarty
> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the quick response Paul, a few questions...
>
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Apr 2017, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
>>
IIUC, the
> On 26 Apr 2017, at 0:15, Joe Touch wrote:
>
> First, correcting the subject line (sorry - that looks like an erroneous
> paste on my part).
>
> Also below...
>
> On 4/25/2017 1:59 PM, Yoav Nir wrote:
>> Hi, Joe
>>
>> I haven’t been involved with this draft, but I don’t
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 2:15 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
>
> First, correcting the subject line (sorry - that looks like an erroneous
> paste on my part).
>
> Also below...
>
> On 4/25/2017 1:59 PM, Yoav Nir wrote:
>> Hi, Joe
>>
>> I haven’t been involved with this draft, but I don’t
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 5:48 AM, Mirja Kühlewind wrote:
>
> Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps-09: Discuss
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the
Hey Paul,
I'm reading through the comments and trying to think of ideas here
and will continue to think about this a bit more, so I may have other
ideas tomorrow. inline
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:10 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2017, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
>
Hi Ben & others,
I may be able to help on a few of these, but the editors (etc.),
please correct me if necessary.
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 9:42 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps-09: Discuss
>
>
On Tue, 25 Apr 2017, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
[ Note at least Joe Touch seemed to think I'm an author. I am not. I
meant the royal "we" as in the IPsecME WG. I have a vested interest
because as an implementer I want an interoperable standard for this ]
The port discussion in other AD
First, correcting the subject line (sorry - that looks like an erroneous
paste on my part).
Also below...
On 4/25/2017 1:59 PM, Yoav Nir wrote:
> Hi, Joe
>
> I haven’t been involved with this draft, but I don’t believe that last
> statement is correct:
>
>> On 25 Apr 2017, at 23:03, Joe Touch
Hi, Joe
I haven’t been involved with this draft, but I don’t believe that last
statement is correct:
> On 25 Apr 2017, at 23:03, Joe Touch wrote:
>
>>
>> This issue is really everyone circling around the elephant in the room.
>> Part of this draft is designed to break through
Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps-09: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer to
Hi, Paul,
On 4/25/2017 12:04 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2017, Joe Touch wrote:
>
>> Ports issues:
>>
>> Every bit pattern, including those using magic numbers, is already
>> owned and under the control of each assigned port. It is not
>> appropriate for any new service to hijack
On Tue, 25 Apr 2017, Joe Touch wrote:
Ports issues:
Every bit pattern, including those using magic numbers, is already owned and
under the control of each assigned port. It is not appropriate for any new
service to hijack that pattern as having a different meaning UNLESS explicitly
updating
Hi, all,
I'm providing this feedback at the request of the ADs.
The port information is based on my experience as IANA port review team lead.
The transport information is based on my experience in TSV-ART.
Joe
Ports issues:
Every bit pattern, including those using magic
Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps-09: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer to
14 matches
Mail list logo