IETF Logo Mail Archive

[karp] Question: splitting RAPD discussion from policy framework discussion in draft-atwood-karp-aapm-rp

Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu> Thu, 01 August 2013 11:18 UTC

Return-Path: <hartmans@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: karp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: karp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D6C711E810F for <karp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 04:18:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.103
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.103 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.496, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=0.992, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 TyogEHv88tzH for <karp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 04:18:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.painless-security.com (mail.painless-security.com [23.30.188.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A1E821F9C01 for <karp@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 04:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.painless-security.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CEC52023F for <karp@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 07:17:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mail.painless-security.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.suchdamage.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yJS8BKnBgd2W for <karp@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 07:17:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (dhcp-4332.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.67.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "laptop", Issuer "laptop" (not verified)) by mail.painless-security.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS for <karp@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 07:17:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (Postfix, from userid 8042) id 86BB680433; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:18:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
To: karp@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:18:21 -0400
Message-ID: <tslzjt2exde.fsf@mit.edu>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Subject: [karp] Question: splitting RAPD discussion from policy framework discussion in draft-atwood-karp-aapm-rp
X-BeenThere: karp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for key management for routing and transport protocols <karp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/karp>, <mailto:karp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/karp>
List-Post: <mailto:karp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:karp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/karp>, <mailto:karp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 11:18:06 -0000

Hi.  During the presentation of our draft, I asked Steve Kent whether he
thought it would be valuable to split the discussion of the conseptual
database similar to aspects of the IPsec PAD and SPD from the broader
policy framework.  He said yes.  I said it would be valuable to get
feedback from others about whether this split is useful.  The chairs
asked me to ask on the list.
7

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email