Re: [Mpls-review] Volunteers needed, draft-zheng-mpls-ldp-hello-crypto-auth

<> Tue, 05 June 2012 07:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92FA321F86DF for <>; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 00:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.248
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Dlz00yvxVb1H for <>; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 00:54:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D70D621F86DC for <>; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 00:54:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 05 Jun 2012 09:53:12 +0200
Received: from ([]) by HE111528.EMEA1.CDS.T-INTERNAL.COM ([2002:7cd:5a57::7cd:5a57]) with mapi; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 09:53:11 +0200
From: <>
To: <>, <>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 09:53:08 +0200
Thread-Topic: [Mpls-review] Volunteers needed, draft-zheng-mpls-ldp-hello-crypto-auth
Thread-Index: Ac0/p3SPVoIgEfKaRFuyheeEdSuwwwDSGedw
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: de-DE
Content-Language: de-DE
acceptlanguage: de-DE
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9762ACF04FA26B4388476841256BDE020115F53336CFHE111543eme_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Mpls-review] Volunteers needed, draft-zheng-mpls-ldp-hello-crypto-auth
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: MPLS Review <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 07:54:15 -0000


I can review LDP/mLDP/P2MP and multicast related drafts (and of course, Seamless MPLS related documents).



Von: [] Im Auftrag von Ross Callon
Gesendet: Freitag, 1. Juni 2012 05:35
Betreff: [Mpls-review] Volunteers needed, draft-zheng-mpls-ldp-hello-crypto-auth

We need a small number (1 to 3) volunteers to review draft-zheng-mpls-ldp-hello-crypto-auth.

The reason that we are asking for volunteers is that in order to review this properly, a reviewer needs to have a least a bit of knowledge of cryptographic authentication. Of course the document uses authentication algorithms defined by others, but a reviewer would need to know enough to at least be able to make sure that the right information is included in the TLV that this document defines, and that the references cryptographic algorithms are the right ones (or at least a good start, since more could be added during the normal WG process).

Thus, can we have a small number of volunteers who know enough to take a look at this?

Thanks, Ross
(for the MPLS WG chairs)