Hi Dhruv,
Sorry for being slow. Yes, these changes look fine. Thanks for accommodating
my concerns. I’ve cleared my discuss.
Regards,
Rob
From: iesg On Behalf Of Dhruv Dhody
Sent: 05 October 2022 14:03
To: Rob Wilton (rwilton)
Cc: The IESG ;
Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support-13: No Objection
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,
Hi WG,
Please note the early directorate review policy from RTG ADs. In the PCE
WG, we have done that in the past for some documents; going forward we
would be doing this uniformly for all.
Thanks!
Dhruv & Julien
-- Forwarded message -
From: Andrew Alston - IETF
Date: Wed, Oct
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'IGP extension for PCEP security capability support in PCE discovery'
(draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support-13.txt) as Proposed Standard
This document is the product of the Link State Routing Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are
IESG state changed:
New State: Approved-announcement to be sent
(The previous state was IESG Evaluation::AD Followup)
Datatracker URL:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support/
___
Pce mailing list
IANA action state changed to "In Progress"
Datatracker URL:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support/
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
Hi,
Thanks for kicking off work to get PCEP able to work with TLS1.3.
This is important.
However... :-)
I think it would be helpful to clarify that statements about what
implementations must or must not do (etc.) should be scoped as
"implementations of this document." That is, you are not
