Re: [babel] Work to do

[David Schinazi <[e-mail]>]

> On Mar 25, 2018, at 03:30, Juliusz Chroboczek <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 1. draft-ietf-babel-rfc6126bis
> 
> This has been in last call, like, forever.  We're still waiting for IESG
> review, let's please make it happen.  Donald, Russ, could you please poke
> the responsible AD?

+ 1

> 2. draft-ietf-babel-source-specific
> 
> This is ready for standardisation.  Joel Halpern has reviewed -02 and -03,
> and the -03 review was positive.  Last call, please?

+1

> 3. draft-ovsienko-babel-rfc7298bis
> 
> I am in favour of adopting straight away.

+1, I'll definitely review this draft but that can happen after WG adoption

> 4. Babel over DTLS
> 
> Three points of contention:
> 
>  4.1 does DTLS go over the Babel port, or do we request a different port
>      for Babel over DTLS?
>  4.2 is the client port equal to the server port, or do we use ephemeral
>      ports on the client side?
>  4.3 do we leave Hello/IHU unprotected, or do we send Hello/IHU over
>      unicast and do something smart for link quality estimation?
> 
> I think that Antonin and David should get in touch, and produce
> a compromise draft that it not necessarily consensual (perhaps with all
> reasonable choices outlined).  Once we have a draft, we can ask for
> adoption, and work out the details at the working group level.

Sounds like a good plan to me.

Antonin, do you want to take the lead on the Babel over DTLS draft?

> 5. draft-ietf-babel-information-model
> 
> Barbara's working copy (post -01) makes a lot of sense to me.  I suggest
> she should submit -02 with the changes we discussed, and have it reviewed
> by Toke, David, and hopefully Markus.  Since Toke's implementation is the
> most complete, his input is likely to be the most useful (and critical).

Happy to review -02.

David