Re: [OPSAWG] draft-vaughn-tlstm-update-01 (TLSTM Update to support TLS 1.3)

Hi - On 2021-10-21 1:28 PM, Kenneth Vaughn wrote: ... If I properly understand your suggestion, you are requesting that we make the new document a stand-alone document and the group could separately consider the retirement of RFC 6353 - perhaps on a separate timeline. ... That seems

Re: [OPSAWG] draft-vaughn-tlstm-update-01 (TLSTM Update to support TLS 1.3)

Randy, If I properly understand your suggestion, you are requesting that we make the new document a stand-alone document and the group could separately consider the retirement of RFC 6353 - perhaps on a separate timeline. If this is an accurate summary of your request, it is largely captured

Re: [OPSAWG]  WG Adoption Call for draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-03

Carsten Bormann wrote: > While the original pcap format has held up very well over time, a more > modern format is needed for some applications. Pcapng is widely agreed > to be that(*), and publishing a specification that has had input from > the operational community is an

Re: [OPSAWG]  WG Adoption Call for draft-gharris-opsawg-pcap-02

+1. On 20.10.21 22:44, Carsten Bormann wrote: On 2021-10-20, at 22:22, Henk Birkholz wrote: this email *extends* the ongoing call for Working Group Adoption on https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gharris-opsawg-pcap-02 until *Sunday, October 24th*. I believe WG time spent to get an

Re: [OPSAWG] draft-vaughn-tlstm-update-01 (TLSTM Update to support TLS 1.3)

Hi - On 2021-10-20 8:38 PM, Kenneth Vaughn wrote: I would like to present https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vaughn-tlstm-update-01/ . This document is a proposal to update to RFC 6353 (TLS Transport Model for SNMP) to