Re: [IPsec] NUDGE: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-ipsecme-dh-checks

Johannes Merkle <johannes.merkle@secunet.com> Wed, 10 April 2013 12:28 UTC

Return-Path: <Johannes.Merkle@secunet.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 D62F021F9612 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 05:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SkoLVI2UdAPV for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 05:28:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a.mx.secunet.com (a.mx.secunet.com [195.81.216.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E82121F90B8 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 05:28:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (alg1 [127.0.0.1]) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 081921A008A for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:28:31 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: by secunet
Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (a.mx.secunet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id IoR2MKb70SEV for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:28:29 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-srv1.secumail.de (unknown [10.53.40.200]) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8222F1A0085 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:28:29 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.208.1.73] ([10.208.1.73]) by mail-srv1.secumail.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:28:29 +0200
Message-ID: <51655AEC.9040203@secunet.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:28:28 +0200
From: Johannes Merkle <johannes.merkle@secunet.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ipsec@ietf.org
References: <9F821C79-A855-4060-A356-ED8E5C50048B@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <9F821C79-A855-4060-A356-ED8E5C50048B@vpnc.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Apr 2013 12:28:29.0370 (UTC) FILETIME=[E82349A0:01CE35E6]
Subject: Re: [IPsec] NUDGE: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-ipsecme-dh-checks
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 12:28:33 -0000

"Looks fine, please publish"

Johannes

> [[ So far, we have received only *one* review of this document, from Tero. If we don't receive more reviews, the document might not progress due to lack of interest. Please review this document within the next week and contribute your review to the list. ]]
> 
> Greetings. This is the start of the WG Last Call for draft-ietf-ipsecme-dh-checks; the WG period will end in two weeks, on April 15. The current draft is available at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipsecme-dh-checks-01
> 
> Given that this will be a Standards Track document, it is important for it to be reviewed by as many people as possible. Possible results of individual reviewing the document are:
> 
> - "Looks fine, please publish"
> 
> - "Looks fine, here are some comments"
> 
> - "Has some problems, here they are"
> 
> - Other things of that sort
> 
> Many people on this mailing list are IPsec implementers but are mostly or completely silent on the mailing list. If you are one of those people, doing a WG Last Call review is a good way to participate usefully in the WG. Please strongly consider (a) reading the current draft and (b) sending a message to the list with your short or long review. If there are too few reviews on this document, we could get pushback from the IESG about the document.
>