[lamps] Proposed conflict review response for draft--irtf-cfrg-gcmsiv
Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Fri, 21 December 2018 16:37 UTC
Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1850130E33 for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:37:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 oy6f6dLPZw0w for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:37:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22f.google.com (mail-lj1-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22f]) (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 6D115130E34 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:37:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22f.google.com with SMTP id c19-v6so5273723lja.5 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:37:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=tZy/9Oq8k/TSv1RPM3J+Un5oTm74yxuDKDMKPLX9l1Y=; b=kgL2+TY94loVQYIn6H/4W2h3rQIMmCcZs8BK+zgnSs7DCie3wuXfsLM1HeWDf77IEh SKnqNGkdY8gqUZF+aCtznfGY6cBLqocvttcrPT+QyRYIsSZs9E0YmCvBId4Eig11dyBO MO2TpQLWMQXo8RaMocgF2O7yntSHXqeTR/c0vQLjv0zKK2wYA3nQlmW4p+Npw8BkssQZ 97c4NTgxhe2DgbvPu0H+/4MA3BazYwXx8V1iEwucwWvL51YgpJoCmeIkvAYi2b1hCCoh +rBjhbIbyskLaZjFJisirwdKY/TJdGwdEGimncpDvHwVSdaN/+fME/GZTYxxMkukCjYl Xx3A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=tZy/9Oq8k/TSv1RPM3J+Un5oTm74yxuDKDMKPLX9l1Y=; b=srmj3Bp25501lArersXp1EhCRexbXk9huovCeQA+EhwSmkBeNb1RS6C0xeW2tZJumk zIWk74q7aTud3dDEeIGOpn00KZPNjucXNPibh9t5+X7MU2NNz2bryxkLX3s3ZOtv78gF XrF6se/OI6zHwfpivwBDn6A+y4PJn+jkJqTzlKEcN6bDRlvJhSAKAGp8g8ZfJPENAlDN TQaXL1Tvg3bfaLXOQpsvA9zpEmtewPwONgzxGMFvSmQMVp6fQeP+/dP4aH9B3mcdAnDP tStQXDuu9T5HKtZCwHi12jwNh6Wo7EDTZ67mYE8Ec2beXxLtsZ5oOueQk1oTWuidPJPU M1UA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdADNCoDhbjf2JPReGVyVorUJ9xO1/vqimixAXwjRKhCg9p2Wev 0/p7fCVI7HpiNP/Ru92C8kglSFKj7Zc/b9J9xxCRpw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN5eXUKMLbcyIjMgSzHkzGjl/9S8XJEcmz959qlj8WNEMefMbO3/Ci3cSCGa64+Yse7JFlkPPqFPlYs9QvSxS4c=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:3218:: with SMTP id y24-v6mr2241008ljy.157.1545410274683; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:37:54 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:37:18 -0800
Message-ID: <CABcZeBPS-WC2sdW=T7WMLpDOYmg+x6OkFNY4QrzaHtyShGXj8A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>, saag@ietf.org, IPsecME WG <ipsec@ietf.org>, SPASM <spasm@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000747e33057d8ade10"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/lsDQtLmUjGuCMGuMyuHxjiVu4Jo>
Subject: [lamps] Proposed conflict review response for draft--irtf-cfrg-gcmsiv
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is a venue for discussion of doing Some Pkix And SMime \(spasm\) work." <spasm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spasm/>
List-Post: <mailto:spasm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 16:37:59 -0000
I am shepherding the conflict review for this document. I propose to say: The IESG has concluded that this work is related to IETF work done in LAMPS, TLS, and IPSECME, but this relationship does not prevent publishing. -Ekr
- [lamps] Proposed conflict review response for dra… Eric Rescorla