Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status

[Miika Komu <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

On 09/16/2014 08:20 AM, Tom Henderson wrote:
> On 09/15/2014 04:37 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
>> Hi Tom (Henderson),
>>
>> Jari, Brian, and Ted still have discusses on this document. Could you
>> please summarize for each of them the status of this draft with respect
>> to their particular comments?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Gonzalo
>>
>>
>
> Gonzalo, the most recent status on this draft was posted to the HIP list
> in this message:
>
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hipsec/current/msg03942.html
>
> Since then, it seems that Jari and Brian have cleared their discusses.
>   I believe that the IANA issues have been mostly resolved (Ted's
> discuss).  Ted's discuss was against version -14 of the draft, while we
> are at version -17 now.  There is a lingering comment that I haven't
> picked up from Barry (item 5 in the above email) that pertains to IANA
> text; I plan to publish those in version -18.
>
> I could probably put out a version -18 shortly that may resolve all of
> the open issues, but it just requires that I generate a new Appendix C
> example packet.  I'll try to get to that in the next day or two.

I wrote a checksum generator, and I have independently verified that the 
checksums in RFC5201-bis are correct.