[IPsec] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-ipsecme-roadmap-03

Yaron Sheffer <yaronf@checkpoint.com> Mon, 10 August 2009 21:05 UTC

Return-Path: <yaronf@checkpoint.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04D993A6881 for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:05:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t6RV4w2s2ofO for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:05:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dlpdemo.checkpoint.com (dlpdemo.checkpoint.com [194.29.32.54]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 875923A6E39 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:05:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by dlpdemo.checkpoint.com (Postfix, from userid 105) id CA2A729C004; Tue, 11 Aug 2009 00:05:31 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from michael.checkpoint.com (michael.checkpoint.com [194.29.32.68]) by dlpdemo.checkpoint.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E5F929C002 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Aug 2009 00:05:31 +0300 (IDT)
X-CheckPoint: {4A80898A-0-14201DC2-1FFFF}
Received: from il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by michael.checkpoint.com (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10) with ESMTP id n7AL5A3d027179 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Aug 2009 00:05:10 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com ([126.0.0.2]) by il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com ([194.29.32.26]) with mapi; Tue, 11 Aug 2009 00:05:10 +0300
From: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf@checkpoint.com>
To: "ipsec@ietf.org" <ipsec@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 00:05:07 +0300
Thread-Topic: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-ipsecme-roadmap-03
Thread-Index: Acn84GccXdkwAkW2QlWsL8kxCqVagwdG+9MQ
Message-ID: <7F9A6D26EB51614FBF9F81C0DA4CFEC80158E120A80B@il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com>
References: <7F9A6D26EB51614FBF9F81C0DA4CFEC8E8ABD594E4@il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com>
In-Reply-To: <7F9A6D26EB51614FBF9F81C0DA4CFEC8E8ABD594E4@il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg="SHA1"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0022_01CA1A17.62B80EC0"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [IPsec] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-ipsecme-roadmap-03
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 21:05:10 -0000

This is the beginning of a two-week WG Last Call, which will end August 24.
The target status for this document is Informational (to obsolete RFC 2411).
The current document is at
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipsecme-roadmap-03.

If you have not read the document before now, please do so. Having fresh
eyes on the document often brings up important issues. This document is very
much a survey, so please also review it for completeness: are there
documents that should be mentioned but aren't. Send any comments to the
list, even if they are as simple as "I read it and it seems fine".

Please clearly indicate the position of any issue in the Internet Draft, and
if possible provide alternative text. Indicate the nature or severity of the
error or correction, e.g. major technical, minor technical, nit, so that we
can quickly judge the extent of problems with the document.

Thanks,
            Yaron