IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Nea] Verifying consensus on changes to PB-TNC I-D since WGLC

Stephen Hanna <shanna@juniper.net> Mon, 02 November 2009 23:43 UTC

Return-Path: <shanna@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: nea@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nea@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0D1C3A690A for <nea@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2009 15:43:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Nu2I2FrWyyJ7 for <nea@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2009 15:43:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod7og103.obsmtp.com (exprod7og103.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.159]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E1B73A6867 for <nea@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2009 15:43:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from source ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob103.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKSu9u0ClMmVowwX/RUwrsEf0x/gfwBID6@postini.com; Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:44:18 PST
Received: from p-emfe02-wf.jnpr.net (172.28.145.25) by P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.375.2; Mon, 2 Nov 2009 15:41:50 -0800
Received: from EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net ([fe80::1914:3299:33d9:e43b]) by p-emfe02-wf.jnpr.net ([fe80::c126:c633:d2dc:8090%11]) with mapi; Mon, 2 Nov 2009 18:41:49 -0500
From: Stephen Hanna <shanna@juniper.net>
To: "nea@ietf.org" <nea@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:39:58 -0500
Thread-Topic: [Nea] Verifying consensus on changes to PB-TNC I-D since WGLC
Thread-Index: AcpcDR0+QLbCMJlFSYGAUoTERHgt1gAB6sAgAAAzwsA=
Message-ID: <AC6674AB7BC78549BB231821ABF7A9AE8FF5094AAE@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
References: <043901FAFD488D44ACC9CCED00470BDC09935B@XMB-RCD-105.cisco.com> <AB96CED633A7C246BDC661DBEE1CF01F07F980CD@TUS1XCHCLUPIN11.enterprise.veritas.com>
In-Reply-To: <AB96CED633A7C246BDC661DBEE1CF01F07F980CD@TUS1XCHCLUPIN11.enterprise.veritas.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "tim.polk@nist.gov" <tim.polk@nist.gov>
Subject: Re: [Nea] Verifying consensus on changes to PB-TNC I-D since WGLC
X-BeenThere: nea@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Endpoint Assessment discussion list <nea.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea>, <mailto:nea-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nea>
List-Post: <mailto:nea@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nea-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea>, <mailto:nea-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 23:43:59 -0000

I also support the changes.

Thanks to the IESG for providing careful review and valuable
feedback from all perspectives on these specifications. The
resulting specifications are much better as a result of this
review and the resulting changes.

Thanks,

Steve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nea-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:nea-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of Paul Sangster
> Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 6:33 PM
> To: Susan Thomson (sethomso); nea@ietf.org
> Cc: tim.polk@nist.gov
> Subject: Re: [Nea] Verifying consensus on changes to PB-TNC 
> I-D since WGLC
> 
> I support the changes. 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nea-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:nea-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> > Behalf Of Susan Thomson (sethomso)
> > Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 2:38 PM
> > To: nea@ietf.org
> > Cc: tim.polk@nist.gov
> > Subject: [Nea] Verifying consensus on changes to PB-TNC I-D 
> since WGLC
> > 
> > The IESG has completed its evaluation of the PA-TNC and 
> > PB-TNC drafts, and is ready to approve publication.  However, 
> > the PB-TNC draft includes significant changes to the pb-tnc 
> > state machine, as well as additional PT requirements, and the 
> > AD and WG chairs would like to confirm that working group has 
> > reviewed these changes and is comfortable with the result.
> > 
> > Specifically, the CLOSE batch type was introduced and error 
> > handling was tightened up to address issues raised by members 
> > of the IESG. These changes are incorporated in the -06 draft 
> > of pb-tnc, and appear throughout section 4 (including its 
> > subsections). The additional PT requirements are listed in a 
> > new section in Section 3.3.1.
> > 
> > Please review these changes and respond by Mon, Nov 16, 5pm PT.
> > Indicate in your response whether you support the changes. If 
> > you do, a short response indicating this is all that is 
> > necessary. If you do not, please explain your concern and how 
> > the issue can be resolved.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Susan & Steve
> > _______________________________________________
> > Nea mailing list
> > Nea@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> Nea mailing list
> Nea@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email