Re: Last Call: RPC: Remote Procedure Call Protocol Specification Version 2 to Proposed Standard

Allison Mankin <mankin@isi.edu> Wed, 03 May 1995 01:25 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13482; 2 May 95 21:25 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13478; 2 May 95 21:25 EDT
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa26350; 2 May 95 21:25 EDT
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13469; 2 May 95 21:24 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13465; 2 May 95 21:24 EDT
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa26324; 2 May 95 21:24 EDT
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-17) id <AA15329>; Tue, 2 May 1995 18:25:39 -0700
Message-Id: <199505030125.AA15329@zephyr.isi.edu>
To: kasten+iesg@ftp.com
Cc: hinden@ipsilon.com, iesg@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Reply-To: mankin@isi.edu
Subject: Re: Last Call: RPC: Remote Procedure Call Protocol Specification Version 2 to Proposed Standard
In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 02 May 1995 11:33:36 -0400. <9505021533.AA23590@mailserv-D.ftp.com>
Date: Tue, 02 May 1995 18:25:39 -0700
X-Orig-Sender: iesg-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Allison Mankin <mankin@isi.edu>

Frank,

There was consensus on the documents fidelity to practice,
both in the WG (which met at 3 IETFs, the last one a year
ago, at which time the group finished reviewing the specs), and in
the Transport Area Directorate.  I thought I made such a
comment on both the IESG list and in our retreat.  I would not
go to Last Call without viewing it this way.  If you have
noticed any problems with the drafts yourself, please pass them
to me, of course, or raise them in the Last Call.

I am working on the ballot writeup now.  

The Informational submission on
oncrpc security, which so far has not gotten
into the Last Call, through an error in
our procedure, is not quite well-balanced, heavily 
documenting a deprecated approach based on Diffie-Hellman,
and not giving enough information about kerberized
oncrpc.  I've asked the WG chair to correct that
since we didn't submit the document yet anyway.

Allison