Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc4307bis

Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 09 January 2017 14:43 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BN6PR09MB1427FEFE4970F7DDB412AAD9F0640@BN6PR09MB1427.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAHbuEH4pqTK-kc65FVh98X-t+YsVe+9=J7_PjB8hESsY+5=-PQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.20.1612121254150.14930@bofh.nohats.ca> <CAHbuEH4MgqDpWR_yc21Z8-HNU1Pvy8Hyz0NvW9qntwtxFuZmmw@mail.gmail.com> <CAHbuEH7RROEheNbAJ9RpE+V8TiP1DYa92CbXEMQcas7wDUoYKg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.20.1701061555210.2069@bofh.nohats.ca> <CAHbuEH46LQ=rk4aTqcbCa+=De5HPwbGBRQQOCzdV0tB0pz1wfw@mail.gmail.com> <BN6PR09MB1427FEFE4970F7DDB412AAD9F0640@BN6PR09MB1427.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
From: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2017 09:43:23 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHbuEH6pYvWk79KgjdW=L7cnxm5vQZOhRcFu4mPUOE2+Ndu_TQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Waltermire, David A. (Fed)" <david.waltermire@nist.gov>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114d3f9ec0dce40545aa6365"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/0347m5DrKiVSsyRwXluYtxrkWsE>
Cc: "ipsec@ietf.org" <ipsec@ietf.org>, "paul@nohats.ca" <paul@nohats.ca>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc4307bis
Precedence: list

Hi Dave,

Yes, I can remove the telechat date and reset it when the WG os ready.
With that, it seems it would be fine to add time to the IETF last call
(restart).

Thank you,
Kathleen

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Waltermire, David A. (Fed) <
david.waltermire@nist.gov> wrote:

> Kathleen,
>
>
>
> I am just getting back after taking a long holiday. Sorry I was AFK on
> this one.
>
>
>
> We want to advance rfc7321bis to go through the remainder of IESG review
> with 4307bis as a pair. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to get this done
> before leaving on holiday. I need to do a WGLC on rfc7321bis starting ASAP
> this week. Can you hold 4307bis for a bit to have the two run concurrently?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> *From:* IPsec [mailto:ipsec-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Kathleen
> Moriarty
> *Sent:* Friday, January 06, 2017 4:01 PM
> *To:* paul@nohats.ca
> *Cc:* ipsec@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc4307bis
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 Jan 2017, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
>
> I never got an answer as to whether or not I should wait on the last call,
> so I pushed it through.  No comments
> came in during the holiday period.  Should last call be extended?  Or does
> the WG feel the reason was because the
> document is ready?  If the latter then I'll get it ready for an IESG
> telechat.  I'd prefer to put it on 2/2/2017
> as there are already a fair number of documents on the telechat in 2 weeks.
>
>
> If you schedule it for 2/2 then I guess we can give people another two
> weeks for comments? Although I'm not sure if that means we will get
> more comments :)
>
> I'm not sure we'll get more either.  Is 2/2 okay or is there any rush for
> this draft?
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Kathleen
>



-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen

[IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc4307bis Kathleen Moriarty
Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc43… Paul Wouters
Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc43… Kathleen Moriarty
Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc43… Kathleen Moriarty
Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc43… Paul Wouters
Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc43… Kathleen Moriarty
Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc43… Waltermire, David A. (Fed)
Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc43… Kathleen Moriarty
Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc43… Waltermire, David A. (Fed)