IETF Logo Mail Archive

[I2nsf] Is there any objection of merging the content from draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology to draft-ietf-i2nsf-framework draft?

Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com> Wed, 02 August 2017 17:31 UTC

Return-Path: <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: i2nsf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i2nsf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA4A6131D29; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 10:31:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.221
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 5BRHEqpHR-JG; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 10:31:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10117131C28; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 10:31:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml701-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DLV07947; Wed, 02 Aug 2017 17:31:18 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.208.112.39) by lhreml701-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.42) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 18:31:17 +0100
Received: from SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.153]) by SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.240]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 10:31:12 -0700
From: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
To: "'i2nsf@ietf.org'" <I2nsf@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-i2nsf-framework@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-i2nsf-framework@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology@ietf.org>
CC: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>, 'Kathleen Moriarty' <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: Is there any objection of merging the content from draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology to draft-ietf-i2nsf-framework draft?
Thread-Index: AdMLsnZIC2IMwOI6RRm8+6fYAf7oNA==
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2017 17:31:11 +0000
Message-ID: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F65943677F@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.192.11.174]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F65943677FSJCEML702CHMchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090203.59820C67.00FF, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.4.153, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 2061633f24d1e420b8d342d9906c8a9b
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2nsf/MXiCk2qcGVTlBqLX-PoH4haNgM0>
Subject: [I2nsf] Is there any objection of merging the content from draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology to draft-ietf-i2nsf-framework draft?
X-BeenThere: i2nsf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "*I2NSF: Interface to Network Security Functions mailing list*" <i2nsf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i2nsf>, <mailto:i2nsf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i2nsf/>
List-Post: <mailto:i2nsf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i2nsf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf>, <mailto:i2nsf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2017 17:31:23 -0000

I2NSF participants:

During the IETF99 I2NSF Session, our AD Kathleen said that the current IESG doesn't like to have RFC for Terminology only drafts. So we should consider merging the content of Terminology with other drafts. I2NSF framework draft would be a nature place to have the terminologies.

If you have any objections or concerns of merging the content from draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology to draft-ietf-i2nsf-framework draft, please express them to the I2NSF mailing list.

Thanks, Linda & Yoav.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email