After reviewing feedback from the WG and discussing it with my co-chairs
and our ADs, it doesn't seem we have strong enough consensus to change
to June 3rd. In addition June 2-5 is a long weekend in UK this year, so
blame me for not willing to spend one of these days on the phone ;-).
So, the
Hi WG,
On 22 May 2012, at 07:08, "Murphy, Sandra" wrote:
> An eagle eye reader points out that the agenda deadline before the June
> meeting is in May, not June, and the day after tomorrow is still May, not
> June.
>
> Still. Get any requests for topics in asap. Agenda deadline is Wed 23 Ma
Hi,
On 22 May 2012, at 08:21, Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> On May 22, 2012, at 10:52 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>
>> Hi WG,
>>
>> On 22 May 2012, at 07:08, "Murphy, Sandra" wrote:
>>
>>> An eagle eye reader points out that the agenda deadl
Dear WG members,
The WG needs to decide about the date and type of the next interim
(after June 6th). The earlier proposal stated June 29th. Are people
happy with this date or do they want to propose an alternative? Note
that we are more flexible this time, because this is not tied to any
othe
Hi Randy,
On 26 May 2012, at 08:47, Randy Bush wrote:
> alexey,
>
>> The WG needs to decide about the date and type of the next interim
>> (after June 6th). The earlier proposal stated June 29th. Are people
>> happy with this date or do they want to propose an alternative?
>
> i doubt i woul
On 25/05/2012 16:47, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
Dear WG members,
The WG needs to decide about the date and type of the next interim
(after June 6th). The earlier proposal stated June 29th. Are people
happy with this date or do they want to propose an alternative? Note
that we are more flexible
Hi,
Please send your discussion topics by the end of Friday. If there are no
topics/not enough topics, chairs might cancel the virtual interim. (The
face-to-face one on July 27th will happen as planned.)
Thank you,
Alexey, as a SIDR co-chair
___
sid
On 15 Jun 2012, at 03:14, Randy Bush wrote:
> we can always discuss draft-ymbk-rpki-grandparenting-00.txt
How much time do you think we will need to discuss it?
>
> i can try to put out a -01
___
sidr mailing list
sidr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/m
Hi,
On behalf of SIDR WG chairs I would like to initiate 2 weeks acceptance call
for draft-ymbk-rpki-grandparenting starting from today, August 4th. Please send
your positive or negative feedback to the mailing list or directly to chairs.
Thank you,
Alexey
__
On 17/08/2012 18:02, Murphy, Sandra wrote:
The authors believe that the draft is ready for publication. This announces a
two week last call. The WGLC will end 31 Aug 2012.
Please report to the list whether you support publication of this draft or not.
The draft is available at
http://tools.i
I've reviewed the mailing list discussion a year ago and I think that
comments raised on the mailing list were addressed. There was an
alternative procedure suggested on the mailing list, but I haven't see
any support for it from others on the mailing list. So I wrote the
shepherding write-up a
On 08/11/2012 05:53, Byron Ellacott wrote:
Hi Chris,
On 08/11/2012, at 3:04 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 1:36 AM, Byron Ellacott wrote:
Hi Chris,
When did the WG reach consensus on adopting this draft?
when it spent ~50 mesasages discussing it?
it seems that, even
Hi WG,
Can I please get at least 3 people (other than editors or WG chairs)
that can reply that they looked at the document and it looks Ok? Saying
that there are some issues with the document is also fine. I can't
really send it to our responsible AD without any reviews.
Thanks,
Alexey
Hi,
Sorry for procrastinating on this for so long.
Here are questions I would like to ask WG participants. At this point I
would like to ask people to review the questions and let me know if you
think they are contradictory. If they are clear, I will poll the WG
early next week. Comments on th
Dear WG participants,
I would like to initiate 2+ weeks poll (ending on December 31st 2012)
regarding acceptance of draft-ymbk-rpki-grandparenting-02.txt. Please
reply to questions listed below. Send your replies to the mailing list
or directly to WG chairs . I would like to
avoid extended di
On 12/12/2012 19:56, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
Dear WG participants,
I would like to initiate 2+ weeks poll (ending on December 31st 2012)
BTW, if people think that this date should be postponed due to holiday
season, that would be fine with me.
regarding acceptance of draft-ymbk-rpki
On 12/12/2012 19:56, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
Dear WG participants,
I would like to initiate 2+ weeks poll (ending on December 31st 2012)
Although the poll has ended last year, there was a suggestion to extend
it. If you want to express your opinion, but haven't done so yet, can
you plea
On 11/03/2013 13:54, Andy Newton wrote:
On 3/11/13 9:48 AM, "Matthew Lepinski" wrote:
This seems like quite a reasonable document, and I do not anticipate
that it would take a lot of working group cycles to process this
document. I would, therefore, support adoption of this document by the
wor
Multiple people voiced their support for adopting the document, a couple
of people provided specific comments. Nobody voiced their opposition to
adopting the document. WG participants have spoken, so the document is
now adopted by the WG.
Best Regards,
Alexey, as a co-chair.
_
On 12/03/2013 17:54, Murphy, Sandra wrote:
The authors of draft-rogaglia-sidr-multiple-publication-points have requested
wg adoption.
See http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rogaglia-sidr-multiple-publication-points
Please do respond to the list as to whether you support the wg adopting this as
Hi,
I am sorry I procrastinated for so long to close the acceptance call.
Below are the questions I've asked on the mailing list:
1) Is the problem described/solved by
draft-ymbk-rpki-grandparenting-02 actually a problem that the WG needs
to address? (Answer: yes or no. Additional information i
On behalf of SIDR chairs (Chris and myself, as Sandy is a co-author) I
am starting 2 weeks WG acceptance call onthis document, ending on June
17th. Please send your comments, positive or negative to the mailing
list or directly to WG chairs.
Thank you,
Alexey
Hi Stephen,
On 07/10/2013 16:44, Stephen Kent wrote:
3.1.2 of 6484 says that the CA SHOULD NOT use meaningful names, which
leaves the CA some leeway.3.1.2 in the CPS draft says "The name of the
subscriber will not be "meaningful" ", which is less flexible.OK, so
this is a template that the CAs
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-rpsl-sig-11: 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
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs-16: 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, however.)
Please refer
> On 10 Dec 2016, at 12:40, Sean Turner wrote:
>
>> On Dec 10, 2016, at 06:50, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>
>> Maybe I missed it, but I don't think the document is clear on why new
>> algorithms are needed. Is this specified in one of referenced docume
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-21: 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
> On 5 Jan 2017, at 03:19, Suresh Krishnan wrote:
>
>> On 01/04/2017 09:38 AM, Sean Turner wrote:
>>
On Jan 4, 2017, at 05:09, Randy Bush wrote:
+1 to the comment from Suresh about order. I though that something like
what he proposed will minimize memcopies and possibly us
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017, at 06:30 PM, Mirja Kuehlewind wrote:
> Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol-21: No Objection
[...]
> 1) Why do you need to send two different negotiation capabilities for
> each direction instead of just using two fl
Hi Sriram,
> On 11 Jan 2017, at 20:17, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)
> wrote:
>
> Hi Alexey,
>
> My comment in line below.
>
>> From: Alexey Melnikov [mailto:aamelni...@fastmail.fm]
>> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2017 4:57 AM)
>>
>>>> On
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-publication-10: 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
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-oob-setup-06: 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, however.)
Please
Hi Rob,
> On 31 Jan 2017, at 00:13, Rob Austein wrote:
>
> [Sorry for delay, was out for a while with a nasty flu, still catching up.]
>
> At Sat, 14 Jan 2017 10:56:17 -0800, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> ...
>> -
I don't feel strongly about this either way, but...
> On 9 Feb 2017, at 21:39, Rob Austein wrote:
>
> At Wed, 8 Feb 2017 10:03:32 -0500, Alissa Cooper wrote:
On Jan 19, 2017, at 9:34 AM, Alvaro Retana (aretana)
wrote:
---
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis-08: 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, however
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis-08: 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, however
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-publication-11: 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, however.)
Please refer
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol-07: 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
Hi Rob,
> On 2 Mar 2017, at 13:42, Rob Austein wrote:
>
> At Thu, 02 Mar 2017 03:04:24 -0800, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>
>> --
>> COMMENT:
>>
Hi Tim,
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017, at 01:38 PM, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> > On 02 Mar 2017, at 12:04, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> >
> > Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol-07: Discuss
> >
gt; On 07 Mar 2017, at 16:15, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017, at 01:38 PM, Tim Bruijnzeels wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>>> On 02 Mar 2017, at 12:04, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> A
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol-08: 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
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-validation-reconsidered-08: 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, however
Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-slurm-07: 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, however.)
Please refer to
44 matches
Mail list logo