---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 11:10:10 From: The IESG <[email protected]> Cc: ipsecme mailing list <[email protected]>, ipsecme chair <[email protected]>, RFC Editor <[email protected]> To: IETF-Announce <[email protected]> Subject: [IPsec] CORRECTED Protocol Action: 'IKEv2 Fragmentation' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-fragmentation-10.txt) The IESG has approved the following document: - 'IKEv2 Fragmentation' (draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-fragmentation-10.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the IP Security Maintenance and Extensions Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Kathleen Moriarty and Stephen Farrell. A URL of this Internet Draft is: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-fragmentation/ Technical Summary This document describes a method to avoid IP fragmentation in large IKEv2 messages. It shows how to perform fragmentation in IKEv2 itself, replacing them by series of smaller messages. This allows IKEv2 messages to traverse network devices that don't allow IP fragments to pass through. Given that this is a protocol extension, it is meant to be a Proposed Standard. Working Group Summary Was there anything in the WG process that is worth noting? The WG discussion of the document was fairly good, with about average participation (which for the IPsecME WG means "the chairs had to beg a bit for more participants, but we then got them"). We also got a "TSVDIR-ish review" of the draft, which got good discussion on the list. There was a reasonable amount of give-and- take, and the WG Last Call was uncontentious. A significant point was brought up during IETF Last Call, and was added to the Security Considerations as a result of the SecDir review. A few issues came up during the first IESG review. Another series of edits occurred along with detailed reviews by a couple of area experts. The edited draft went back through WG last call and is ready for IESG review again. Document Quality The draft had working group consensus and there is one implementation to date. The WG discussion of the document was fairly good, with about average participation (which for the IPsecME WG means "the chairs had to beg a bit for more participants, but we then got them"). We also got a "TSVDIR-ish review" of the draft, which got good discussion on the list. There was a reasonable amount of give-and-take, and the WG Last Call was uncontentious. A significant point was brought up during IETF Last Call, and was added to the Security Considerations." Personnel Paul Hoffman (IPsecME WG co-chair) is the document shepherd and Kathleen Moriarty is the responsible AD. _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec _______________________________________________ Swan-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libreswan.org/mailman/listinfo/swan-dev
