Re: [Roll] draft-ietf-roll-security-framework returned to working group.

[Abdussalam Baryun <[e-mail]>]

 I thought that this informational draft had in 2011 enough position
to pass (subject to resolve discuss position), also not sure why the
draft left to expire while it had a new version in 2012 without any
discussion from January until July [1].

 There was no abstain or objection positions, but discuss positions,
meaning things can be fixed [2-3]. Am I missing some thing?

[1] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll/current/msg06615.html
[2] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg68450.html
[3] http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html

Regards
Abdussalam

>
> This document has sat in IESG Evaluation::AD Followup for 467 days.
>
> The blocking issue has been that the document does not actually provide any
> security guidelines or mechanisms, and RPL itself (RFC 6550) is also sadly
> lacking.
>
> Michael Richardson and I sat down with Stephen Farrell (Security AD) and
> cooked
> up a plan to generate some useful security documents for RPL. Inevitably
> this
> will introduce more delay, but at least there is a plan that we might manage
> to
> execute. Michael has introduced the plan to the WG and there seems to be
> support.
>
> Part of this plan involves pulling draft-ietf-roll-security-framework back
> from
> the IESG, returning it to the WG, and re-casting it as a threat analysis
> (something it does quite well at the moment).
>
> Thus, this document is returned to the working group for further work.
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian
>
>