Since RFC6916 was the algorithm agility procedures RFC we’d all been waiting for, it makes sense to now point to it directly from the 6485bis. It’s an informative reference to RFC6919, but RFC6916 is a BCP so it’s probably fine. Let’s progress this one.
spt > On Mar 21, 2016, at 17:20, Sandra Murphy <[email protected]> wrote: > > A nagging reminder. There has been no comment, pro or con. > > It’s a short draft. Please do review and say whether you want the draft to > progress or not. > > If you want to see the differences in this latest version, one way is to look > at the tools page for the draft: > > draft page: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6485bis-05 > side-by-side diff: > https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6485bis-05.txt > > —Sandy, speaking as one of the wg co-chair > > On Mar 9, 2016, at 6:28 AM, Sandra Murphy <[email protected]> wrote: > >> As discussed in December, a new version for draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6485bis was >> required to deal with an IESG comment on the Security Considerations section. >> >> The authors have submitted a new version and ask for a working group last >> call. >> >> This starts the wglc which will end on 23 Mar 2016. Please review the draft >> for its readiness for publication and provide comments to the list. >> >> Positive support is needed in order to judge consensus for publication, so >> please do comment on the list. >> >> The draft is available at: >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6485bis-05. >> >> —Sandy, speaking as one of the wg co-chairs >> _______________________________________________ >> sidr mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr > > _______________________________________________ > sidr mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
