IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] draft-ietf-ipsecme-qr-ikev2 has been in RFC Editor queue for 123 days?

Valery Smyslov <smyslov.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 19 May 2020 19:01 UTC

Return-Path: <smyslov.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFEA63A0FBF for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 May 2020 12:01:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 lO8ZODp7Qlyh for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 May 2020 12:01:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x234.google.com (mail-lj1-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D274F3A1050 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 May 2020 12:01:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x234.google.com with SMTP id g4so931707ljl.2 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 May 2020 12:01:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index :content-language; bh=ZHENPm6kx8zcClYilumLIljUzGJvevnPyuu3CBQE2xE=; b=IN+RnxlfgkPQ0vztU4+4DQg1fAyvIqFcNaVu1r54bgNirJCrMT4K4+bIHuGgGhjHYg ePQ/EKWvhIsWufkNEIjEaZvw2Bf/4SxztMPjpjysESZMPoPqwiP4jqEQKg6HUhFALHhC 7cbsE7rCkFWycUaIjfu2+z8V5ZOXOvUorIrXsyEVHv1FbQCZk0ZSrtSx3XH8xpsLOwjO hrlvdyswjAZU5OTYbdgIG8afP2gKuCaQAOZPHltfgplj5HpxqhgNY2UUY+Iefb/0aoO+ dbJbaUko8NmKRYR176HPs9LFZ4VRYFmogsRNT1DA2Ufk20Iu9abKXcR4cMyTL8R9C+Xt Xg0g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index :content-language; bh=ZHENPm6kx8zcClYilumLIljUzGJvevnPyuu3CBQE2xE=; b=pZJoS4+9cv8ElNG4v6wya7nTHFCUpR+Jk/PVSrRrjhwKw478HrKtwblgIwviYbYzqz bRJiWjfDSmr7fIesuVe9sHW76d9affWx9ELuzgMG6D0WC2twIoutOFqyqPuVZ+KRiTEz ECNSg6M6+jt3Dedy8s7rchsWfwja876ATWSibZK5WeJNHgEkHKKYVcw91xUTJ0a3mgTK X2pPitMr7Ma6c7HOVx9eq6W9VIAlDyMPbFHexksAWBx5EGnL9toPy6w5Y22OeuVHUUO+ l7T1sq0F7zeHnxvDZjkp9bPNpnyqyDw9bf84k1+mYHBxxGeoDme1TV9KSKuYcrLM9DiF UZ+w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5319PWM6SYypn3w1F5DYsJ8FL7mP5q+gRmXshNtUydylDxnsUP80 93eHj2sy/sZvlmL6DrXGGEYTVznd
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyCXy4WmwBOy4/9f6Expv+1pZlKiaVrKObaYT4AoukfxL2CDhKS9lPdAkuGJ2lAWdESUPMODw==
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:2a82:: with SMTP id q124mr523402ljq.155.1589914864520; Tue, 19 May 2020 12:01:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from chichi (95-27-147-103.broadband.corbina.ru. [95.27.147.103]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r13sm218816ljh.66.2020.05.19.12.01.02 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 19 May 2020 12:01:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Valery Smyslov <smyslov.ietf@gmail.com>
To: 'Paul Wouters' <paul@nohats.ca>, 'Benjamin Kaduk' <kaduk@mit.edu>
Cc: ipsec@ietf.org
References: <alpine.LRH.2.21.2005191335330.15337@bofh.nohats.ca> <20200519174859.GO58497@kduck.mit.edu> <alpine.LRH.2.21.2005191446020.16348@bofh.nohats.ca>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.21.2005191446020.16348@bofh.nohats.ca>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 22:00:58 +0300
Message-ID: <00f801d62e0f$d5c39480$814abd80$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQJuXPI+9tAsvPeTRNDnxhmXCAeimwH4SZnPAUc1J9WnZWctEA==
Content-Language: ru
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/R48FZuOinE-5ZOECzRXmkwFOjLg>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] draft-ietf-ipsecme-qr-ikev2 has been in RFC Editor queue for 123 days?
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 19:01:24 -0000

Hi,

> On Tue, 19 May 2020, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> 
> >> Can the WG chairs or AD see about getting this unstuck and out the
> door?
> >
> > There's a giant backlog in the "RFC-EDITOR" state (see
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/current_queue.php); my understanding is
> that
> > this accumulated in the gap period between Heather and John, and
> there's
> > not really a way to make the overall queue move faster.
> 
> Oh, I see.

Ben, thank you for the explanation. The draft has already 
endured unfortunate delay in the WG, this one is just another unfortunate
one.
That is that.

> >  It is possible for
> > the IESG to request expedited processing of a specific document, if
> needed
> > -- is there a timely need for an RFC number for this document that we
> > should do so?
> 
> Ahh, no there is no reason for an expedited processing.

I agree with Paul (with co-author hat on).
The code-points are already allocated and several vendors have implemented
the draft.
The only thing left is an RFC number to refer to, but we can wait for it.

Regards,
Valery.

> Paul
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> IPsec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email