RE: [MSEC] MSEC status update

[Liu Ya <[e-mail]>]

Sure. I will post to MSEC mail list all the latest information about
the requirements or discussions on OSPFv3 automated keying.

Lakshminath Dondeti wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for the update.  If you have an initial version of the 
> requirements or threads of discussion on the OSPF list that 
> MSEC should 
> read to catch up on this, please do let us know.
> 
> regards,
> Lakshminath
> 
> Liu Ya wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > At the San Diego meeting, OSPF guys agreed to work on 
> OSPFv3 automated
> > group keying and write a requirement doc. The concluded
requirements
> > will be feedbacked to MSEC WG. New work items may come forth. 
> > 
> > In fact, we are preparing that doc. After an initial analysis, it
is
> > very possible that existing GKM protocols do not function well  to
> > meet all OSPFv3 requirements. This means there may be 
> chance to extend
> > GKM protocols to support OSPFv3 keying, and obviously it is 
> difficult
> > to finished this work before Chicago. This is my concern. 
> >  
> > Regards,
> > Liu Ya
> > 
> > Lakshminath Dondeti wrote:
> >> Folks,
> >>
> >> After a long hiatus, I am back on this with high priority. 
>  First of
> > 
> >> all, my sincere apologies for dropping this for so long.  I 
> >> was in India 
> >> for about 4 weeks, after that catching up on things at work and 
> >> generally postponing MSEC work until today.  A few of you 
> >> prompted me, 
> >> and I have tried to get some work done before today, but it 
> >> just did not 
> >> work out.  Anyway, that is behind us and let us get going 
> with some 
> >> energy so we can finish the work and close MSEC soon.
> >>
> >> We have a lot to do and I would like MSEC to stop meeting 
> >> after Chicago, 
> >> if all goes well.  I have scheduled time for us in Prague, 
> so please
> > 
> >> plan for it accordingly.
> >>
> >> That out of the way, we have the following drafts at the WG 
> >> completion 
> >> or near completion stage:
> >>
> >> I.
> >> MIKEY-applicability: Has finished last call and I will be 
> >> forwarding it 
> >> to Russ shortly.
> >>
> >> II.
> >> ECC: Are we ready to do a WG last call on this?
> >> MSEC-IPsec : Same question: Are we ready to do WGLC?
> >> GDOI-Update: Ditto
> >>
> >> Did I miss any from that category?
> >>
> >> III.
> >> We desperately need to finish the following drafts ASAP:
> >> GKDP:
> >>
> >> IV.
> >> TESLA-ALC-NORM:  What is the status on this?
> >> draft-ietf-msec-ipsec-composite-group:  Ditto!
> >>
> >> V.
> >> New work (to be adopted after asking for group's opinion):
> >> GDOI-SRTP: My opinion is that it is a good idea to have 
> >> draft-baugher-msec-gdoi-srtp taken up as a WG item.  I will ask
> > group 
> >> opinion on this today.
> >> TESLA-IPsec: Ditto (Note: I wrote it, but I am merely an 
> >> editor trying 
> >> to finish the work; the original authors, except for Ran are 
> >> not active 
> >> in the group any longer.  This is a gap filling exercise anyway,
so
> > I 
> >> feel comfortable that there are no conflicts of interest 
> >> here.  I will 
> >> ask the group of course).
> >> draft-weis-esp-group-counter-cipher-00: Ditto.
> >>
> >> Again, let me know if I missed anything?
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks for your patience folks.  Let's get some work done.
> >>
> >> best regards,
> >> Lakshminath
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> MSEC mailing list
> >> [e-mail]
> >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/msec
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 



_______________________________________________
MSEC mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/msec