IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dtn-interest] Comments on RFC 6257

Michael Noisternig <michael.noisternig@cased.de> Mon, 24 June 2013 09:43 UTC

Return-Path: <michael.noisternig@cased.de>
X-Original-To: dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 654F011E80E7 for <dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 02:43:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.791
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.458, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SPfc4i5xqEJA for <dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 02:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lnx503.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de (lnx503.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de [130.83.156.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6B2921F9E12 for <dtn-interest@irtf.org>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 02:43:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.cased.de (mail.cased.de [130.83.33.42]) by lnx503.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/HRZ/PMX) with ESMTP id r5O9hiDR012342 for <dtn-interest@irtf.org>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:43:44 +0200 (envelope-from michael.noisternig@cased.de)
Received: from [130.83.33.155] (cased155.cased.tu-darmstadt.de [130.83.33.155]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.cased.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 839CE41A0B8 for <dtn-interest@irtf.org>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:43:44 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <51C814CD.10105@cased.de>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:43:41 +0200
From: Michael Noisternig <michael.noisternig@cased.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dtn-interest@irtf.org
References: <51C02448.20902@cased.de> <A5BEAD028815CB40A32A5669CF737C3B236000DA@ap-embx-sp40.RES.AD.JPL>
In-Reply-To: <A5BEAD028815CB40A32A5669CF737C3B236000DA@ap-embx-sp40.RES.AD.JPL>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-PMX-TU: seen v1.2 by 5.6.1.2065439, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2013.6.24.93016
X-PMX-RELAY: outgoing
Subject: Re: [dtn-interest] Comments on RFC 6257
X-BeenThere: dtn-interest@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The Delay-Tolerant Networking Research Group \(DTNRG\) - Announce." <dtn-interest.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/dtn-interest>, <mailto:dtn-interest-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn-interest>
List-Post: <mailto:dtn-interest@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtn-interest-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest>, <mailto:dtn-interest-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 09:43:53 -0000

> If we come out of that meeting with some agreement, then I think it would then make sense to revisit your comments at that time in the light of the simpler draft spec.

That sounds fair. Thank you for taking your time to read through all my 
comments and for your detailed replies!

Michael

>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dtn-interest-bounces@irtf.org [mailto:dtn-interest-bounces@irtf.org] On Behalf Of Michael Noisternig
> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 2:12 AM
> To: dtn-interest@irtf.org
> Subject: [dtn-interest] Comments on RFC 6257
>
> Part (3/3) of my review: Comments on the Bundle Security Protocol document.
>

<skipped>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email