IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [L2tpext] WG Adoption of Keyed IPv6 Tunnel [draft-mkonstan-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel]

"BOU DIAB, BASHAR (BASHAR)" <bashar.bou-diab@alcatel-lucent.com> Mon, 10 March 2014 06:37 UTC

Return-Path: <bashar.bou-diab@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: l2tpext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l2tpext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E6161A03D3 for <l2tpext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 23:37:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham
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 c-_ToWP3nIT4 for <l2tpext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 23:37:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com (ihemail1.lucent.com [135.245.0.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 801661A0316 for <l2tpext@ietf.org>; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 23:37:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us70tusmtp2.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-5-2-64.lucent.com [135.5.2.64]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id s2A6bWnB025192 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <l2tpext@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 01:37:32 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from US70TWXCHHUB03.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (us70twxchhub03.zam.alcatel-lucent.com [135.5.2.35]) by us70tusmtp2.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id s2A6bWDi013538 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <l2tpext@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 02:37:32 -0400
Received: from US70UWXCHMBA05.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.10.153]) by US70TWXCHHUB03.zam.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.5.2.35]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 02:37:31 -0400
From: "BOU DIAB, BASHAR (BASHAR)" <bashar.bou-diab@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: "l2tpext@ietf.org" <l2tpext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: RE:[L2tpext] WG Adoption of Keyed IPv6 Tunnel [draft-mkonstan-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel]
Thread-Index: Ac88KzU367mtJ3rdS3yVV13xkxIh3Q==
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 06:37:32 +0000
Message-ID: <282743323CDC0448BEFD2C9CB236457E09F56139@US70UWXCHMBA05.zam.alcatel-lucent.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.5.27.18]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_282743323CDC0448BEFD2C9CB236457E09F56139US70UWXCHMBA05z_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l2tpext/7vJYcFt8Jz6l_WjTZQ-WxbQrGdg
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 05:59:08 -0700
Subject: Re: [L2tpext] WG Adoption of Keyed IPv6 Tunnel [draft-mkonstan-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel]
X-BeenThere: l2tpext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Layer Two Tunneling Protocol Extensions <l2tpext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/l2tpext>, <mailto:l2tpext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/l2tpext/>
List-Post: <mailto:l2tpext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l2tpext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2tpext>, <mailto:l2tpext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 06:41:14 -0000

Support as a network solution consultant for its lack of signaling-overhead and scaling benefits.
Bashar Bou-Diab
[L2tpext] WG Adoption of Keyed IPv6 Tunnel [draft-mkonstan-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel]
________________________________

  *   To: "l2tpext at ietf.org<mailto:l2tpext@DOMAIN.HIDDEN>" <l2tpext at ietf.org<mailto:l2tpext@DOMAIN.HIDDEN>>
  *   Subject: [L2tpext] WG Adoption of Keyed IPv6 Tunnel [draft-mkonstan-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel]
  *   From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata at cisco.com<mailto:cpignata@DOMAIN.HIDDEN>>
  *   Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 20:33:28 +0000
  *   Accept-language: en-US
  *   Archived-at: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l2tpext/c06snBQQUTx_WX1KJo6X8A0mZcw
  *   Cc: "draft-mkonstan-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel at tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-mkonstan-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel@DOMAIN.HIDDEN>" <draft-mkonstan-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel at tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-mkonstan-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel@DOMAIN.HIDDEN>>
  *   Delivered-to: l2tpext at ietfa.amsl.com<mailto:l2tpext@DOMAIN.HIDDEN>
  *   Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com<mailto:i=@cisco.com>; l=1452; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1393878810; x=1395088410; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=e2U8TwAqy1UnEPdQ+V01BigxEllPjg2MX51jvC4wQ7s=; b=cMI5ebUYTAhwGJAdhiPVT9/6TeTF4qC3jnzczbISTtR12TMgs4EgHjJd bhG/gtrMGs8535DRX2a8nQlPKKLby4kaMGQ4dukHcd66rpHgQhWnGq3ls EMXsVVciqm2lW0e+B0n+uKJ/ukTww3Blmy/OYLVZML2VxTkMrZ/FX7I/B c=;
  *   List-archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/l2tpext/>
  *   List-help: <mailto:l2tpext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
  *   List-id: Layer Two Tunneling Protocol Extensions <l2tpext.ietf.org>
  *   List-post: <mailto:l2tpext@ietf.org>
  *   List-subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2tpext>, <mailto:l2tpext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
  *   List-unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/l2tpext>, <mailto:l2tpext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
  *   Thread-index: AQHPNx/V4LVBgSNREk+0k0rZkVGQBw==
  *   Thread-topic: WG Adoption of Keyed IPv6 Tunnel [draft-mkonstan-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel]

________________________________

WG,



The authors of 'Keyed IPv6 Tunnel' have requested that L2TPEXT adopts this draft as a WG document. The draft received discussion and comments on the list, and was updated twice based on list feedback.



http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mkonstan-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel-00



This message starts a three-week Call for WG Adoption for draft-mkonstan-l2tpext-keyed-ipv6-tunnel-00. Given that IETF89 is going on right now, we are adding an extra week to this adoption call. The call for adoption will end on Monday, March 24th.



Please share your thoughts on this adoption call on the list -- we will not be taking silence as support. Bonus points supporting a yes/no email with a technical explanation as to why.



Thanks!



Carlos.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email