IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [icnrg] Heads up: CCNx specs adoption discussion

Dirk Kutscher <ietf@dkutscher.net> Fri, 09 December 2016 16:18 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@dkutscher.net>
X-Original-To: icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C3E129486 for <icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 08:18:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-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 Hv0EReULN4Yd for <icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 08:18:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.kundenserver.de (mout.kundenserver.de [212.227.17.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 577D512711D for <icnrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 08:18:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Dirks-MBP.fritz.box ([31.17.251.109]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue101 [212.227.15.183]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LdVp4-1cwjNw2vmk-00ikdM for <icnrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:18:26 +0100
To: icnrg@irtf.org
References: <545320f0-5d61-78f0-c42b-a18ef0eff388@dkutscher.net>
From: Dirk Kutscher <ietf@dkutscher.net>
Message-ID: <d07b2463-d920-cb1c-4a52-8973a76d0c44@dkutscher.net>
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:18:26 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <545320f0-5d61-78f0-c42b-a18ef0eff388@dkutscher.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:f/6CjcgyKGTS+ctZi1zVhXdKvEb2TCoDsTaTpPHu7Qi5CyUHan2 XppSkvXk35XHT8fi4PSjBGMMvd9Mw5CmuFwq6U/mTRgUlK6zQ2mvxx+NJfe3yAWMDbiHod9 9+MuUUQOVXCTWyyR06jCXphHzvBZPeRrOKDJTPNpqNiwG75B/f6d4NgCnhJ1rHGLno7Rz2v +aatNoOwUz0525iru2+Xg==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:JPNuBiXjzWM=:uDpHA8FYzcBLgMsMP3Yxbs mqbaMeSFcyl22LKlJERD92DHKhAxeLPliOtfwX0+MFMZ1v0YAwOvsBxP8m5VN2SvWHzLSc8Mm jCRlsMgXEUNbD72Vytp+fN/DAy1KTfhGx41DS/WPPdxWnfwz3zL1zBybc1TsczMjoLSJt7m61 U5nxW4aM0THPBLaJn9k9EkEaBJinLcYDtKhw0F+JdG8jfx4wtbGA4TYeBdfFO0BpGm/WPda+N KvDqzKz6fszLL6OOx4PhT083F8cwHBNcXOQoGVcHKEw+PKmms1+Mcx9oThJmWfXgExfZFc1xr G5BBasm8ObHgtgroLRxONfOPmUVgo+TawUJ3ewIUaoR0DHSRGlmEu2JeQ9yI1Ap9csvq954IQ rQAk+mCUD1TXNsPIYEuYSRyxKu2Zu99Na2GEuP2pHEtz681qHaFkCtjNwqfYvVn8aK+2AwnOt WJtCKW7pSZ26SqSNIOPVy6TrmZmNfIDl0nCsyNct1d8X7JnreD/0OzmI2jZJiYK0/gxfJCPLb Eq7X/aYTBFu/rt/3flt8JyswhF9NeO+n7P4PYd1xfsCFfAiRbie4bcNO9AxCzfzVFokXoau3f GI3Y6nraFD5ICXaHAoJoZ3PalzGwTg6citZR/q9oxszWPtFzSpzYGIujLZcqZXu9408cS8zcB G8sSwu89XS32HPsgCdtcUsbI/wpl6QVzaVyuA9fVAsVnaoU8jp/EOF+Gxdwj3x5xSG7K5vchH 6TMNpFWNOYOFtgDe
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/icnrg/uwmlAzr45hr75xeqGVVesEH45-k>
Subject: Re: [icnrg] Heads up: CCNx specs adoption discussion
X-BeenThere: icnrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Information-Centric Networking research group discussion list <icnrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/icnrg>, <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/icnrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:icnrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg>, <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2016 16:18:35 -0000

Hi,

as you have seen, we added the flic specification to this list.

Any feedback on all of these drafts proposed for adoption is welcome.

Best regards,

Dirk, Börje, Dave



On 07/12/2016 21:34, Dirk Kutscher wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> at our meeting in Seoul, we said that we are currently 
> feature-freezing the ccnxsemantics and ccnxmessages documents, 
> awaiting the outcome of our harmonization effort.
>
> There are however a few other specifications that complement the 
> above-mentioned ones and that are relatively mature so that we could 
> consider adopting them as RG documents.
>
> The documents are:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wood-icnrg-ccnxkeyexchange/
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mosko-icnrg-ccnxurischeme/
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mosko-icnrg-beginendfragment/
>
>
> The goal for adopting these documents would be to advance them to 
> experimental RFC status in ICNRG.
>
> When doing this, the usual conditions apply:
>
> - we'd like to see support for adopting these documents
>
> - we'd like to see some interest in helping to progress these 
> documents (for example, by reviewing them)
>
> - if adopted, these change control is transferred to ICNRG, i.e., they 
> become group work/research items.
>
> In the following e-mails, I will ask for corresponding feedback for 
> adopting each of these three documents individually. Please provide 
> your feedback on adopting the documents individually. Any reply is 
> welcome.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dirk, Dave, Börje
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> icnrg mailing list
> icnrg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email