IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc7321bis-05: (with COMMENT)

Daniel Migault <daniel.migault@ericsson.com> Wed, 15 March 2017 13:18 UTC

Return-Path: <mglt.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 C1A9F129C00; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 06:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 k7s13hlFFDoI; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 06:18:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x244.google.com (mail-it0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::244]) (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 1D499129A9C; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 06:18:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x244.google.com with SMTP id g138so3034363itb.0; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 06:18:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=aDEBMxcKWOhlnTPpoOEK/StUzYz4/Vbl4MF271O4OLI=; b=ZdQu8WBE3SCfjn3yXz1idr1oSv1Lqce75ziqaKpqUylLm9+sA5YsT/QWAk9jngRtk3 yQpyXZmHAfBhGhZ57cfrjpOID1MHKiOHC7Ea2DRFV6LXUnRguB65LwHF1irulRNsJjlt T8nfOp+CwNNzJLn2vqsRW8jidiuETBWE1e2bIUCES+0wiFpIpq6lTmqdDJnctEO+y2R9 iXdHReooP6530VIdfbAaGhuYjQO7RSK6A7Bwj9Dknif9iWDgBna8tRysqZkNWRK+CPTm lhXixyDQ14LYZNUbOdoHjWuNQdB1lbNzN18Q2MRU+Kg43JTdaH7v1ucO11KtV64J+i53 x9/w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=aDEBMxcKWOhlnTPpoOEK/StUzYz4/Vbl4MF271O4OLI=; b=kVd9A0vNHCfVhYPsdWNKAJ8cM3NFNPjDxpUXAm3DYwA8xdjHcSowR748vBY1rBTzp4 x8iDjTUs3fbtkjTFOoMg3c7iKSSqrWdm9RvrSJ9ZBAK4Akar/XT/pT5nqH2qiJjm8IQB RBh3vWowi1Yj9/nvElJi8US2etGJZAevRL0W2EZZlJ5YSc6ohdjSg1fZLX7Y2UOQuri8 2Pd8zckBgdsQ65vEnbgS1J7AmwinGqJDdHyGevCMjaE74NLD/o8nRVxHoN2FUY4avf8d vpLKNwbAZarvS93TCV8zRmEX1eZTc4abKkujktt3q2V8dR+rrvxtI4lANkMgqWJYPFNw 8APQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H33zxOR44QOWElg6x31S792CzE8OiA/O6zky0eU35UygohokZngORf5z5rSSmYmhAZlDCLUO1pggcdHZg==
X-Received: by 10.36.184.129 with SMTP id m123mr4971376ite.120.1489583933488; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 06:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: mglt.ietf@gmail.com
Received: by 10.107.35.213 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 06:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <148958062948.24307.17742891713464962830.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <148958062948.24307.17742891713464962830.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Daniel Migault <daniel.migault@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:18:53 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: XUXd7xu8EUfUyuOcxTKKEMldaIY
Message-ID: <CADZyTkkHispfio5-GAMY+sWNzYonAywCaoChWOrbVztB2ie5gQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc7321bis@ietf.org, "ipsec@ietf.org" <ipsec@ietf.org>, ipsecme-chairs@ietf.org, "Waltermire, David A. (Fed)" <david.waltermire@nist.gov>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c114576380e1c054ac4c95f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/qjOzr5k4yzhQCky5TL1VGhI-iHA>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc7321bis-05: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 13:18:56 -0000

Hi Alissa,

Thanks you for the review and the comments.  The recommendation is mostly
here for implementation that needs to consider interoperability with IoT
devices. This includes the IoT devices themselves. So I have replaced "IoT
interoperability" with "to interoperate with IoT devices". Happy to change
it if there is a better wording.

Yours,
Daniel

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote:

> Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc7321bis-05: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc7321bis/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Interoperability with IoT" doesn't parse when I read it -- maybe you
> mean "for IoT devices to interoperate" or something like that?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> IPsec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email