Re: [Anima] Processing: draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Mon, 27 January 2020 23:27 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHw9_iJpch28_OMB5fkEcNB8L-i_V_MsOUhkgd6MN_NejFduGw@mail.gmail.com> <20539.1580164741@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <20539.1580164741@localhost>
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 18:26:55 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iLUpNdtSCkGUqd2P+bmVkiCVBHCbai1xYzNbvjxJ6cyVQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Cc: draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra.all@ietf.org, anima@ietf.org, anima-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/lJGOhAEDnAQ7xbBFIeT8v6OWr_Q>
Subject: Re: [Anima] Processing: draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra
Precedence: list

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 5:39 PM Michael Richardson
<mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
>
>
> Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
>     > I'm now the responsible AD for draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra.
>     > As mentioned in
>     > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/SnHOxgWNC3u2jOecGWLQSWKVTjo
>
> I didn't realize that some reply from non-chair would be useful, so I didn't.
>
>     > I'm trying to figure out what the state on this document it, and what
>     > is outstanding for it to be published.
>
> Hi, thank you for taking this on.

Glad to help.

>
>     > Can someone summarize for me where this currently stands?
>     > There are literally hundreds of mails on this, and it was a long time
>     > since I last read / balloted on this - I'm trying to restore state
>     > without having to go back to the beginning...
>
>     > A: it **looks** to me like the -34 version addresses Benjamin's
>     > "examples should be correct" concern in "Section C.1.4.  Pledge key
>     > pair", but I'm not quite sure (his email and this version both
>     > happened on 2020-01-03, but I'm not sure on the ordering).
>     > Can someone confirm this and then I'll follow up with him?
>
> Ben has an outstanding DISCUSS that would like the examples updated.
> I'm in the process of doing this.  I felt that it could wait until AUTH48,
> when we'd be sure to have all IANA allocations, but we have since early
> allocations for everything, so it can be done now.
>
> I had hoped to finish the code changes by last Friday, but it will be another
> couple of days before I can fix the code with the right OIDs and validate the
> examples work.  Ideally, I would interop the updates against the other
> implementations that Thomas Werner has.
>

Thank you for the status updates / confirming where we are.
Also, thank you for being willing to address these, and please SHOUT
LOUDLY to make sure I see the updates when posted.

W

>     > B: Alissa confirmed that her concerns have been addressed, and cleared
>     > her DISCUSS.
>
> Yes.
>
>     > As this isn't / wasn't my WG, please SHOUT LOUDLY to make sure I don't
>     > miss replies / updates.
>
> Roman had a DISCUSS.
>
> --
> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
> ]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [
>
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>
>
>


-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf

[Anima] Processing: draft-ietf-anima-bootstrappin… Warren Kumari
Re: [Anima] Processing: draft-ietf-anima-bootstra… Warren Kumari
Re: [Anima] Processing: draft-ietf-anima-bootstra… Michael Richardson