Re: [IPsec] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps-09: (with DISCUSS)

I'll defer to Tero on this one. Tero, what do you prefer to do with the IANA Considerations text? Thanks, Tommy > On Apr 28, 2017, at 4:41 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF > wrote: > > This is still Mirja's Discuss (which I supported), so I'll let her respond to >

Re: [IPsec] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps-09: (with DISCUSS)

This is still Mirja's Discuss (which I supported), so I'll let her respond to most of Tommy's proposed text changes, but on the last one ... On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Tommy Pauly wrote: > > 14. IANA Considerations > >This memo includes no request to IANA. > > *

Re: [IPsec] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps-09: (with DISCUSS)

Hello all, Here's some proposed text for: - Clarifying the configuration model around ports - Clarifying the role of the stream prefix - Expanding the TCP performance considerations. Changes are in bold. Thanks, Tommy --- 2. Configuration One of the main reasons to use TCP

Re: [IPsec] small correction : draft-abad-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protectio

Hi Sandeep, > El 26 abr 2017, a las 11:26, Sandeep Kampati > escribió: > > Hi All, > > small correction > > 8. Data model > > Data model for the SDP entries: --> it should be"Data model for the > SPD entries: “ Thanks. We expect to have a new

Re: [IPsec] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps-09: (with DISCUSS)

Hi Tero, a few quick replies but we also discussed this yesterday at the telechat and agreed on a way forward. On 27.04.2017 16:12, Tero Kivinen wrote: Mirja Kühlewind writes: I agree that this kind of port squatting is regrettable, but I also don't think it really helps to not publish RFCs