IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] Fwd: Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-16: (with COMMENT)

Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> Tue, 11 September 2018 22:41 UTC

Return-Path: <farinacci@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFF9C130FB5 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 15:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 eTiC3RfWOJ0W for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 15:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22e.google.com (mail-oi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22e]) (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 9873E130FEA for <lisp@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 15:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id 8-v6so50515410oip.0 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 15:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=RprDFlXll9oVDVSbSMJ02besSPxESoII5I+TPXqIL3k=; b=uMyWe3oB60LkUN5qyCPuvnLPL4LBMEVmswn39vUUbLb8EWN4u1SfdL6ghDtRU6jS2x U0MSFNxrGIiVePD2X4QRkDy+CobOSlPfQn4dpuK2n3WzY4e4Wr6WTppQly+gfhqvyMDZ D56D/3uT+rnix5rEpEO5E9Fz7ySR8JQl90D0swpc2C+83mY41QbU4nQ/0MY6tUtBnPmk +OWL+YPZsHoRjDVplEdR4jcniDy2yx1oZuTaQQTlDksDqvnMF5X95MRZH2NCRs6EdD4p ffs9PeKXhxSQ0oYaOVkaebdE2dTArYBZPckze7ZnMA5BKNwaNwB6d+w/1tyneA9oGf2L /mqQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=RprDFlXll9oVDVSbSMJ02besSPxESoII5I+TPXqIL3k=; b=O0mw/tW8CxJ/EVMvTvqTzwrYmHhK+/OHDcoJEHtE2f456Te7iiTtbNa5NyPyzu95w8 +Uz9YYGp7HvSjWQglF3k3VeLI1eEppEUA3Q1P73VdtE4qpKxeYGludh0X0uc+5aPS88u nuZV05E4KHXccLebMxDgiy6O4wKYiQJVseEUdD6oe3mEs7pLWMHQeuqpCNQDP2m1DauQ NEWaH7n9TjDB7nE/S5SgZXkiezhSgN/bIZ2zh55Q60pYBOgygznf087WteC/1omOF2PA kprS7Er5vl0c5FQDUNp8vFubsOW4XZ5qk6AhmG8wyhQsvgaUDon+T+HK7Ir/AxHKo+N+ BYgw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51CohRo9jNb4YualWi0vDGwZsPPMLvVPZRtqtKn1LEQFISh1irYj GIuHJGF2QMsUbaR5tZlhETA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdbgPKtwGC5P0rcjmV/dYTv0hbDY1vY7m6eX3TmIHm9DrJMHNX5/sxgHpwxHY0cTQrK22+qkXw==
X-Received: by 2002:aca:5a45:: with SMTP id o66-v6mr30114159oib.155.1536705667029; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 15:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dino-macbook.attlocal.net (adsl-108-94-2-123.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net. [108.94.2.123]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x5-v6sm19723857oix.3.2018.09.11.15.41.05 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 11 Sep 2018 15:41:06 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C888405854@MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 15:41:04 -0700
Cc: Albert Cabellos <albert.cabellos@gmail.com>, "lisp@ietf.org list" <lisp@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <07784B97-4057-444E-8719-67DEAE5A56F7@gmail.com>
References: <153661454107.16021.14181238567935017697.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <82C0DF7A-E661-48DF-ABCE-7C830E875E70@gmail.com> <f51f97af-5b4c-ac7f-b239-bc39088a263a@joelhalpern.com> <CAMMESsxdBxCCdAVL5LR-QcknucoKayNFV7mp=jGX+txxVz4fog@mail.gmail.com> <8A78EF35-B0E4-43EC-A6B7-EB7DED60210F@gmail.com> <CAGE_Qexi9hkxEVfkLwy85N94mLbF8xLJ9ycgLgTctN2=ZC5M5A@mail.gmail.com> <F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C8884057A0@MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com> <7DD44D1F-06E5-494D-B760-B1462FD9DC01@gmail.com> <F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C888405854@MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com>
To: "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A" <db3546@att.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/f8hPXSFQyDR4F3xNNP4cuQ0vjkQ>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Fwd: Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-16: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lisp/>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 22:41:17 -0000

Okay, now I understand fully with what you propose. I can go along with it if Albert agrees.

Dino

> On Sep 11, 2018, at 3:00 PM, BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A <db3546@att.com> wrote:
> 
> If we want to get lisp-intro done now, we should leave the reference to RFC6830. If change to the bis, we need to wait until they are published as they also would be listed normatively.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2018 5:14 PM
> To: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A <db3546@att.com>
> Cc: Albert Cabellos <albert.cabellos@gmail.com>; lisp@ietf.org list <lisp@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [lisp] Fwd: Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-16: (with COMMENT)
> 
>> I don’t see lisp-sec as essential to implementing lisp-intro. I don’t know why it was listed as normative? To me, it is providing additional information.
> 
> I agree LISP-SEC is additional information for an introductory document. You bring up a good point.
> 
>> If the working group agrees, I can check with the RFC-Editor if can move lisp-security to informative. I think the change will only need author and AD approval. Does anyone have any concerns? Or is lisp-security “almost done” and should continue to wait?
> 
> I agree with your proposal. But have another question. If we update the lisp-intro to move this reference to Informative, do you at the same time change all occurences of 6830/6833 to the bis document equivalents or do you want to push lisp-intro through?
> 
> I would say go for the latter since the information in 6830/6833 has not changed when shuffling sections around into 6830bis/6833bis. So Albert, the information in RFC6830 is not obsoleted but the document may be.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Dino

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email