IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Hipsec] Comments on RFC5203bis and RFC6253bis

Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com> Tue, 30 June 2015 07:10 UTC

Return-Path: <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8E5B1B3723 for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:10:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tXWA0imDFFLe for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:10:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sesbmg23.ericsson.net (sesbmg23.ericsson.net [193.180.251.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C43231B3722 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:10:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-f79046d000007f53-48-559240cb2f2e
Received: from ESESSHC023.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sesbmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id F4.59.32595.BC042955; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 09:10:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [131.160.126.100] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.89) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.210.2; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 09:10:03 +0200
Message-ID: <559240CB.9050005@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 10:10:03 +0300
From: Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Samu Varjonen <samu.varjonen@helsinki.fi>, hipsec@ietf.org
References: <5583BF80.8060304@ericsson.com> <55891588.80604@helsinki.fi>
In-Reply-To: <55891588.80604@helsinki.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprGLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvje5ph0mhBp/v6VlMXTSZ2eLGzxns Dkwe/Sv3s3ssWfKTKYApissmJTUnsyy1SN8ugStjz1KRgoW8FZ8mfWRpYHzH1cXIySEhYCJx 6PhhNghbTOLCvfVgtpDAUUaJtm8uXYxcQPZaRonp0+6zgiR4BbQlZs99zwRiswioSkyb+xCs gU3AQmLLrfssILaoQJTExK+HWCDqBSVOznwCZosIOEis+9/E3sXIwSEsYC0x+0smiCkk4CGx e4kOSAWngKbEpuUQncwCBhJHFs1hhbDlJba/ncMMcZq2xPJnLSwTGAVmIVkwC0nLLCQtCxiZ VzGKFqcWJ+WmGxnrpRZlJhcX5+fp5aWWbGIEBuTBLb9VdzBefuN4iFGAg1GJh1fhx8RQIdbE suLK3EOM0hwsSuK8MzbnhQoJpCeWpGanphakFsUXleakFh9iZOLglGpgtJUv9+DemGPexF/L IJn5x+UG604//ZSHvw/OMPuwU3fKqp3WokX98jGbhXKtzmTetXvz8Emh5ev6W17vpD0tuzlk d1hlfuJOZfGbp+tUWXJSWX6losa9G1ZtM15dYZ55NdrlVfdOvuuSilcec8xctM4m4+XjQwW1 4jMbJW16Evv9czJ7Vi1SYinOSDTUYi4qTgQAbYgCyykCAAA=
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/POZfB5AUSLKlpuKihh1A87XIC1w>
Subject: Re: [Hipsec] Comments on RFC5203bis and RFC6253bis
X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." <hipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/hipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:hipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 07:10:07 -0000

Hi Samu,

thanks for having revised RFC6253bis:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis/

Could you please let us know the current status of the draft now that it
has been revised? That is, what needs to happen next and what is needed
overall before the draft is ready for WGLC.

Cheers,

Gonzalo

On 23/06/2015 11:15 AM, Samu Varjonen wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> yes, we will update the document as soon as possible.
> 
> BR,
> Samu Varjonen
> 
> On 19/06/15 10:06, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote:
>> Authors of RFC5203bis and RFC6253bis,
>>
>> the RFC5203bis document has a Normative reference to RFC6263bis:
>>
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hip-rfc5203-bis-08#section-3.3
>>
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis-01
>>
>> RFC 6253bis is an expired document. First we need to revise it so that
>> it re-appears in the IETF archives. Additionally, since it is a
>> normative dependency of RFC5203bis, we should include it in the
>> publication batch we are currently working on (RFC5203bis, RFC5204bis,
>> and RFC5205bis).
>>
>> Authors of RFC6253, could you please provide the WG with am update on
>> your plans to revise this document?
>>
>> Authors of RFC5203bis, could you please update the following outdated
>> reference?
>>
>>    draft-ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis -> RFC 7401
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Gonzalo
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Hipsec mailing list
>> Hipsec@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Hipsec mailing list
> Hipsec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email