[OPSEC] minutes part 3 (action items)

Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Sun, 14 December 2008 02:34 UTC

Return-Path: <opsec-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: opsec-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-opsec-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F19D3A6829; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:34:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E4733A6829 for <opsec@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:34:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 L-+ePGc6MQbl for <opsec@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:34:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E01A3A680E for <opsec@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:34:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.118] (c-24-130-16-195.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.130.16.195]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id mBE2Yejj009114 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for <opsec@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:34:41 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com)
Message-ID: <494470BF.3030901@bogus.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:34:39 -0800
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081119)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: opsec wg mailing list <opsec@ietf.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.93.3/8753/Sun Dec 14 00:26:44 2008 on nagasaki.bogus.com
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Subject: [OPSEC] minutes part 3 (action items)
X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: opsec wg mailing list <opsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec>, <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/opsec>
List-Post: <mailto:opsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec>, <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: opsec-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: opsec-bounces@ietf.org

These were the items I took away from or found in the previous two
sections of the minutes please everyone, but especially Ruddinger
Richard and Fernando please comment on anything I might have missed that
we need to pose and answer on the list. deadline for submission of the
minutes is the 19th so we have a couple days still.

* 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?

* draft-gont-opsec-icmp-filtering-00

	Are we concluded that feedback on structure provided during the
	wg meeting was sufficient to proceed?

	Seperate v6 document or not

* draft-ietf-opsec-routing-protocols-crypto-issues-00

	Does this document need to address pim-sm or rsvp

	Other substantive comments?

	Is it ready for last call after another rev?

* draft-bhatia-manral-igp-crypto-requirements-03

	Accept as a working group document?

	Issue about language must- should+ etc (proposed change has
	circulated already)

	change of title (to include authentication)

* draft-kumari-blackhole-urpf-02

	Accept as a working group document?


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