Christian Hopps writes:
> So did the adoption poll succeed? :)
Yes. I did not see anybody objecting to it and there was all usual
suspects supporting it.
The problem why I could not mark it as done is that I had some
problems with my firewall/mailserver/www-server etc and I reinstalled
the whole
Hi,
So did the adoption poll succeed? :)
Thanks,
Chris.
> On Oct 26, 2019, at 11:17 AM, Tero Kivinen wrote:
>
> So this is fast (one week) adoption call for the
> draft-hopps-ipsecme-iptfs draft to be accepted to the WG document. We
> did have quite positive feedback in last IETF meeting and
On Sat, 26 Oct 2019, Tero Kivinen wrote:
So this is fast (one week) adoption call for the
draft-hopps-ipsecme-iptfs draft to be accepted to the WG document. We
did have quite positive feedback in last IETF meeting and the charter
item is being worked on in parallel to this call.
I'm in favour
I have read the -01 version of this draft. I believe it addresses a useful use
case and that the solution presented there is a good starting point.
I support its adoption.
Yoav
> On 26 Oct 2019, at 18:17, Tero Kivinen wrote:
>
> So this is fast (one week) adoption call for the
>
I've read the document and think this is good problem area to work on, and this
document is a good starting place to adopt.
Going forward, I would like to see more discussion and review of the use IP
fragmentation (how often is that really needed, and is it worth the concerns
stated in
I have read the document in a few iterations.
I think that it addresses an important need both for resistance to traffic
analysis, but also it has the potential to deal with the PMTU problems that
tunnels always seem to create.
Please adopt!
--
Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works
As author, I know of no IPR that applies to this draft, and support its
adoption by the WG.
Thanks,
Chris.
> On Oct 26, 2019, at 11:17 AM, Tero Kivinen wrote:
>
> So this is fast (one week) adoption call for the
> draft-hopps-ipsecme-iptfs draft to be accepted to the WG document. We
> did
Hi,
I support adoption and the charter addition. (No surprise as I'm a
contributor to this work.)
Also, I know of no IPR that applies to this draft.
Lou
On 10/26/2019 11:17 AM, Tero Kivinen wrote:
So this is fast (one week) adoption call for the
draft-hopps-ipsecme-iptfs draft to be
> Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2019 6:17 PM
> To: ipsec@ietf.org
> Subject: [IPsec] Adoption call for draft-hopps-ipsecme-iptfs
>
> So this is fast (one week) adoption call for the draft-hopps-ipsecme-iptfs
draft
> to be accepted to the WG document. We did have quite positive feedbac
So this is fast (one week) adoption call for the
draft-hopps-ipsecme-iptfs draft to be accepted to the WG document. We
did have quite positive feedback in last IETF meeting and the charter
item is being worked on in parallel to this call.
If you support adopting this document as WG document and
10 matches
Mail list logo
