IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSEC] minutes part 2

"Bhatia, Manav (Manav)" <manav@alcatel-lucent.com> Fri, 19 December 2008 04:04 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 D9DD23A67D9; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 20:04:13 -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 38FFA3A67D9 for <opsec@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 20:04:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, 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 89l3AnTI3nJz for <opsec@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 20:04:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smail5.alcatel.fr (smail5.alcatel.fr [62.23.212.27]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DAB23A67AE for <opsec@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Dec 2008 20:04:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.63]) by smail5.alcatel.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id mBJ43wgl030811 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 19 Dec 2008 05:03:58 +0100
Received: from INBANSXCHHUB02.in.alcatel-lucent.com (135.250.12.35) by FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (135.120.45.63) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.311.2; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 05:03:58 +0100
Received: from INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.250.12.56]) by INBANSXCHHUB02.in.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.250.12.35]) with mapi; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 09:33:56 +0530
From: "Bhatia, Manav (Manav)" <manav@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Glen Kent <glen.kent@gmail.com>, R Atkinson <ran.atkinson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 09:33:55 +0530
Thread-Topic: [OPSEC] minutes part 2
Thread-Index: AclhKe+jgxVyltBdRkGMP+2t01LAzgAZAX4w
Message-ID: <7C362EEF9C7896468B36C9B79200D835487C9AE0@INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <EC3F7E1D-F7C8-484A-A0C0-1A25E79AD86E@extremenetworks.com> <92c950310812161620j7d8aaa16m553940edadbe6d8f@mail.gmail.com> <12201E12-8A0B-4FBE-95A9-5C8B23DA46EC@gmail.com> <92c950310812171704x76e374bbv1bd74d74f5ca755b@mail.gmail.com> <C2E84336-3E35-4D68-BD81-3E222CD681F2@gmail.com> <92c950310812180801i10ac5f07l4ed58c87778ca9ba@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <92c950310812180801i10ac5f07l4ed58c87778ca9ba@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 155.132.188.13
Cc: "opsec@ietf.org" <opsec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OPSEC] minutes part 2
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

Hi Glen,

There was an implementation of RFC 2154 based on Gated but there are no known deployments of the same. I had a brief exchange with Sandy (SIDR chair and author of this RFC) and she too isn't aware of any deployments. 

Cheers, Manav

> -----Original Message-----
> From: opsec-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsec-bounces@ietf.org] 
> On Behalf Of Glen Kent
> Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 9.32 PM
> To: R Atkinson
> Cc: opsec@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OPSEC] minutes part 2
> 
> >> Its experimental. Lets leave it out of the discussion.
> >
> > It is real and it is (IMHO) a whole lot better than anything
> > else we have -- and I understand at least one implementation
> > exists.  So we should include it in the discussion.
> 
> Is there any deployment of the same? Is the WG interested in this?
> 
> Glen
> _______________________________________________
> OPSEC mailing list
> OPSEC@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
> 
_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
OPSEC@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email