Re: [OPSEC] minutes part 3 (action items)

Fernando Gont wrote:
> At 11:34 p.m. 13/12/2008, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> 
>> * draft-gont-opsec-ip-security-01
>>
>>         Test consensus on list for accepting as a working group document
>>
>>
>>         Preference for desired outcome, informational or BCP?
>>
>>         Venues for cross area review, where should we socialize it
>>
>>                 Are there specifica areas that should get special
>>                 attention?
> 
> I believe the high-order bit for action items relevant to this document
> is to test for consensus on list for accepting this document as a
> working group document. I guess that once we are working on this
> document, we can more formally ask for cross-area review.

agree

> This does not contradict with what you posted... I'm just saying that we
> should probably pursue the action items for this document in the order
> you stated them. That is, first check for consensus for accepting this
> doc as a wg item, then discuss preference for the desired outcome, and
> then discuss how we could implement the cross area review.
> 
> 
> 
>> * draft-gont-opsec-icmp-filtering-00
>>
>>         Are we concluded that feedback on structure provided during the
>>         wg meeting was sufficient to proceed?
> 
> I had asked this one the mailing-list already, and the feedback I got at
> the Minneapolis meeting didn't argue for a change in the structure of
> the document. So the document will continue "as is".

my opinion as well

> 
>>         Seperate v6 document or not
> 
> I will got back to the comments I had received on the v6 stuff. However,
> as I mentioned at the meeting, the high order bit was to agree on the
> structure of the document, as this would affect both the v4 and the
> possible v6 stuff. I will come back with some concrete
> proposals/alternatives for the v6 stuff asap, now that we have agreed on
> the most basic issue that was the structure of the whole document.

I believe the question is does much of what we could address for icmp6
carry the same weight of operational experience that we have with ipv4
icmp messages?

> Thanks!
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> -- 
> Fernando Gont
> e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org
> PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
> 
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
OPSEC@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec