Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-hello-crypto-auth-05

[Loa Andersson <[e-mail]>]

Bary,

On 2014-05-21 16:04, Barry Leiba wrote:
>>> It seems to me that if Manav should write something up and pass it by
>>> Stephen, you could have something that's pretty much ready by the time
>>> Manav posts it as -00.  Post to a few appropriate lists for comments,
>>> post a -01, maybe a -02, then last call it.  That can't be more than a
>>> few weeks.  Then we have a four-week last call, another week in IESG
>>
>> This isnt correct. One we don't know the correct home for such a
>> draft. Even if we do find a home (which am sure is possible) its going
>> to be a very contentious debate on whether HMAC needs Apad or not.
>> Till date, I have not heard of a very convincing reason. People would
>> like to know the reason of why we want this. If we don't have a very
>> convincing reason then it's a long drawn battle which aint finishin'
>> in a few weeks time! :-)
>
> Ack.
> But, then, why is it better to stick Apad in piecemeal, document by
> document, and have the argument all over again every time?
>
> Barry

Are you requesting that we are revising the document that already have
been approved using the "piecemeal" approach? If you are not why can't
we wrp up the last one and move ahead?

/Loa
>

-- 


Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
Senior MPLS Expert                          [e-mail]
Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: [phone]