Re: [Hipsec] Future of draft-ietf-hip-dex

[Miika Komu <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

for what it's worth, I would ok with experimental status due to lack of
PFS but I believe Robert would disagree.

ti, 2021-06-29 kello 07:19 +0000, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) kirjoitti:
> I meant experimental and not informational (sorry about any
> confusion)
> 
> -éric
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Miika Komu <[e-mail]>
> Date: Tuesday, 29 June 2021 at 09:10
> To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "
> [e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, Gonzalo Camarillo <
> [e-mail]>, Eric Vyncke <[e-mail]>
> Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: Future of draft-ietf-hip-dex
> 
>     Hi Eric,
> 
>     I know Robert is going for standards track but is experimental
> track
>     out of question? Maybe informal is not so good because the draft
>     specifies an actual protocol.
> 
>     Besides this, most of discuss points require Robert's expertise.
> 
>     ma, 2021-06-28 kello 13:51 +0000, Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
> kirjoitti:
>     > In the absence of reaction on draft-ietf-hip-dex being back to
> the
>     > HIP WG, let me explain its current status.
>     > 
>     > The draft-ietf-hip-dex draft has not been accepted by the IESG
> in
>     > March 2021 and has been sent back to the HIP WG in order to
> address
>     > multiple DISCUSS blocking points raised by the IESG... A change
> of
>     > intended status to 'informal' could also help the publication
> as well
>     > as strong argumentation that DEX is actually required on
> constrained
>     > devices in 2021.
>     > 
>     > What is the plan of the authors and of the HIP WG on this topic
> ?
>     > Declaring the I-D dead is also possible of course. But, the I-D
>     > should not stay in the limbo forever.
>     > 
>     > Regards
>     > 
>     > -éric
>     >  
>     > 
>