Re: [radext] *[AD] Re: AUTH48 [LB]: RFC 8044 <draft-ietf-radext-datatypes-08.txt> NOW AVAILABLE

Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 23 January 2017 18:59 UTC

Return-Path: <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DC5512967E; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:59:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XAJrpFJaJTo7; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:59:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yw0-x242.google.com (mail-yw0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF734129496; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:59:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yw0-x242.google.com with SMTP id q71so13339814ywg.3; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:59:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=CjADKgFs0XBa9R4ukOj0E5Wtgfbkz8Yo221YOu/Xhgg=; b=A0PwVtFV2MpbvRKHUzfLUKGmRcIk62Oh73hvOjh8Usd3Ks1u+L0VQJdkpn8tpw0lE9 SPgYBYuebVAvZoQX5yLvzNtNGoX09ScH3TPCfK3OVD3onbCpkHBngKoyavnVUn3Nmim6 rqPhFe0pDIurXHKoS2uRfzYe5b83r4BBuFLeOkxTj/SGsE08M0T8DgSwUE1COehGH5PP q8W4ca2iebnbUxb6ijbnW7b3JOHvAv9D5idNBtrrkT1NS36OTbh5XoQrByuhqkjyjycx jZfPsJagBpNdFxI43yvtIZvMDqZx7Ty12ZjRR42rH/PUqLqy5sIjkcWGxJ3l1uTTH/gw YQAA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CjADKgFs0XBa9R4ukOj0E5Wtgfbkz8Yo221YOu/Xhgg=; b=aQ30cDGBGi8NhbPx5YrfI+cM970aHUcByc603UDjawyeKMe3zXuMyt/aNInEqt/DiW df88fVfWEzOUbmeHLepuyDbYprPJfypvlDfYe/DW26Y4Wbd6q8DlomV681QVuWcjFZ5i ysD7AXHXOhwfj6M2EAL1LIl0sBXV43VlvuiFcT15ZR6HpkVrtjQsau6ROFBEiOqOle1i UqwgqaOicy8dFHR2nxnG+vkXjpX3pc8kNHXBIEX1JgL4ff7XnGi5qd1nSQACmOWkajm9 v2Yw1x5PTcrRVAR/JZadUYvJc1HjArR+n6h4dcMbZB5uqu7sXLwNnV2Kim+SC6Q7HSke SpxA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKxVKkVvVNsRLKLWCOvYbpF3bBVBPEsQ2lYQkq9lSjNYa7yD4lmCKzVxe6PsfMI7V84405d3k0kKdp6MQ==
X-Received: by 10.55.198.149 with SMTP id s21mr27743283qkl.196.1485197945040; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:59:05 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.12.170.30 with HTTP; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:59:04 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <E2C2573B-E42F-423B-B57A-DCC28AEFA21C@amsl.com>
References: <20170109233022.14EE5B81304@rfc-editor.org> <CAHbuEH7A2+WyuexCVtFsk8bFGMG5nqOEDwbZY12oVgmwZtaJ5w@mail.gmail.com> <FF91E7C3-72C4-4F77-A957-ED8219B9C523@freeradius.org> <CAHbuEH7-E9VUH+ZxJdqQpr=hjhKFf0obEPLKZLwJHUZBmqF21w@mail.gmail.com> <F1A445D1-C233-41AF-9E1D-8DE50E8DF092@gmail.com> <CAHbuEH6DjWip-Sr=0hRnKz4M5HwrW0H1pY5vAZE_sQHMDWgj9Q@mail.gmail.com> <438C29BB-EB6E-4D10-A538-B0C0F9DACC68@amsl.com> <6A026C96-7C9B-4217-BEE1-E78FCB13487E@amsl.com> <967AA9E0-EC69-475E-8F61-CFF4837A3CD6@amsl.com> <3058D945-CC06-43FD-96FC-80542EA31C96@gmail.com> <70E0728C-DE5F-4ED2-BAD5-3FFB50D79ACA@amsl.com> <B99BD7F6-3468-4B7E-988A-5AAC7EDD8F54@amsl.com> <46889561-7CC5-42E3-8021-8568590C4D6D@freeradius.org> <E2C2573B-E42F-423B-B57A-DCC28AEFA21C@amsl.com>
From: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:59:04 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHbuEH5M3ANQfeeDvYYA0wj0PietP-QU-AZVuTgEj6cY6HQdSg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lynne Bartholomew <lbartholomew@amsl.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11451488ef7dea0546c79784
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/radext/pUhhM2Sm3DAJMF__LvRurpV7EDg>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 01:27:48 -0800
Cc: "Moriarty, Kathleen" <Kathleen.Moriarty@dell.com>, radext-ads@ietf.org, "radext@ietf.org" <radext@ietf.org>, Winter Stefan <stefan.winter@restena.lu>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, Alan DeKok <aland@freeradius.org>, RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, radext-chairs@ietf.org, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [radext] *[AD] Re: AUTH48 [LB]: RFC 8044 <draft-ietf-radext-datatypes-08.txt> NOW AVAILABLE
X-BeenThere: radext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: RADIUS EXTensions working group discussion list <radext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/radext>, <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/radext/>
List-Post: <mailto:radext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext>, <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 18:59:07 -0000

Thank you, all!

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Lynne Bartholomew <lbartholomew@amsl.com>
wrote:

> Apologies; RFC 4072 is now in the "updates" list and is listed in the
> Abstract.
>
> RFC Editor/lb
>
> On Jan 23, 2017, at 10:51 AM, Alan DeKok <aland@freeradius.org> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> On Jan 23, 2017, at 1:44 PM, Lynne Bartholomew <lbartholomew@amsl.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Alan and *Kathleen,
> >>
> >> We are preparing this document for publication, and we found that our
> question regarding the listing for RFC 4072 was not addressed.
> >>
> >> RFC 4072 is listed under Normative References, but it is not cited
> anywhere in the text.  Please let us know whether it should be cited
> somewhere or removed from the references list.  Note for *Kathleen:  If the
> choice is to remove the reference, we will need your approval, because it
> is listed as Normative.
> >
> >  It's listed as Normative because of the "Updates" line which says that
> this document updates RFC 4072.
> >
> >  The only other reference to RFC 4072 was to via an attribute in the
> table which was removed.
> >
> >  I think that leaving RFC 4072 as normative is the correct decision.
>
>


-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen