Indeed. I'd also like to get any early input from Jean-Michel Combes, I believe we addressed the concerns from that review as well.
nb On Mon, Jul 6, 2026 at 12:58 PM Alvaro Retana <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks Nick! > > > I would love a positive ack from the people who raised the issues/suggestions > before moving forward. Specifically, Weiqiang and Tom. > > Thanks! > > Alvaro. > > On June 24, 2026 at 9:50:51 PM, Nick Buraglio ([email protected]) > wrote: > > Apologies for the long tail. We have just published -15 which I think > incorporates all of the agreed-upon above suggestions. > > nb > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 11:42 AM Alvaro Retana <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Thank you to everyone who has made comments and provided reviews! >> >> While there is strong support to move this draft forward, there are still a >> couple of open items that need to be addressed. Even though the period has >> ended and the comments have died down for now, we will wait until the open >> items are addressed before officially closing the WGLC and sending this >> draft to the IESG. >> >> Alvaro. >> >> On May 18, 2026 at 3:44:57 PM, Alvaro Retana via Datatracker >> ([email protected]) wrote: >> >> This message starts a Second WG Last Call for: >> draft-ietf-spring-srv6-security-14 >> >> This Working Group Last Call ends on 2026-06-02 >> >> Abstract: >> SRv6 is a traffic engineering, encapsulation and steering mechanism >> utilizing IPv6 addresses to identify segments in a pre-defined >> policy. This document discusses security considerations in SRv6 >> networks, including the potential threats and the possible mitigation >> methods. The document does not define any new security protocols or >> extensions to existing protocols. >> >> File can be retrieved from: >> >> Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the >> publication of this document by replying to this email keeping >> [email protected] in copy. Objections should be explained and suggestions to >> resolve them are highly appreciated. >> >> Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual >> Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [1]. >> Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions >> of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any. >> Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be >> found at [3]. >> >> Thank you. >> >> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/ >> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/ >> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/ >> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-security/ >> >> There is also an HTML version available at: >> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-security-14.html >> >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-spring-srv6-security-14 _______________________________________________ spring mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
