Re: [lamps] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-lamps-cms-shakes-15: (with DISCUSS)

["Panos Kampanakis (pkampana)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alexey,

> I read the current text as just an instruction to change the draft name to the corresponding RFC number, so clarifying it would be great.

ACK. I will update the endnote to say "Update the TBD1-2 reference when the RFC is published" with any comments that come next. The EDNOTE serves as a reminder and since Roman will make sure the PKIX-SHAKEs RFC gets published first we will be all right. 

Panos


-----Original Message-----
From: Spasm <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Alexey Melnikov
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2019 8:31 AM
To: Roman D. Danyliw <[e-mail]>; The IESG <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; SPASM <[e-mail]>; Russ Housley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [lamps] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-lamps-cms-shakes-15: (with DISCUSS)

Hi Roman,

On Thu, Aug 8, 2019, at 5:50 AM, Roman Danyliw wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: iesg [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Alexey 
> > Melnikov via Datatracker
> > Sent: Saturday, August 3, 2019 2:55 AM
> > To: The IESG <[e-mail]>
> > Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; 
> > [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> > Subject: Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on 
> > draft-ietf-lamps-cms-shakes-15: (with
> > DISCUSS)
> > 
> > Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-lamps-cms-shakes-15: Discuss
> > 
> > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to 
> > all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to 
> > cut this introductory paragraph, however.)
> > 
> > 
> > Please refer to 
> > https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> > 
> > 
> > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-cms-shakes/
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --
> > DISCUSS:
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --
> > 
> > This is a fine document, but I have one quick question:
> > 
> > Values TBD1..TBD4 are not listed in the IANA Considerations section. 
> > Should they be?
> 
> I don't think so.  This document and draft-ietf-lamps-pkix-shakes both 
> need the same OIDs (but have no other dependence).  This latter draft 
> is with the RFC Editor and does register these OIDs.

Ok, I understand now.

>  The current text,
> "[I-D.ietf-lamps-pkix-shake] [ EDNOTE: Update reference with the RFC 
> when it is ready ]", was intended to guide the editor to replace 
> TBD1-4 the OIDs when ietf-lamps-pkix-shake got published.  However, in 
> re-reading the text now, the EDNOTE should actually read "Updated the
> TBD1-2 reference when the RFC is published".

There are 2 places TBD1-2 and TBD3-4. But yes, something like that.

I read the current text as just an instruction to change the draft name to the corresponding RFC number, so clarifying it would be great.

> 
> Make sense?

Best Regards,
Alexey

_______________________________________________
Spasm mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm