[tcpm] Re: [Tsvwg] consensus call: draft-larsen-tsvwg-port-randomization to WG item
Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com> Wed, 03 October 2007 00:16 UTC
Return-path: <tcpm-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Icrup-0002KC-VM; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 20:16:39 -0400
Received: from tcpm by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Icrup-0002Hw-2A for tcpm-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 20:16:39 -0400
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Icruo-0002Hd-6b; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 20:16:38 -0400
Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.170] helo=mgw-ext11.nokia.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Icrun-0004vd-FJ; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 20:16:38 -0400
Received: from esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh108.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.145]) by mgw-ext11.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.2.5) with ESMTP id l930GPPA000794; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 03:16:35 +0300
Received: from esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.34]) by esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 3 Oct 2007 03:15:59 +0300
Received: from esebh101.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.177]) by esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 3 Oct 2007 03:15:59 +0300
Received: from mgw-int01.ntc.nokia.com ([172.21.143.96]) by esebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 3 Oct 2007 03:15:59 +0300
Received: from [12.104.13.79] (daec-linuxvpn058213.americas.nokia.com [10.241.58.213]) by mgw-int01.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.2.5) with ESMTP id l930FsKW002208; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 03:15:55 +0300
In-Reply-To: <CE913D4A-891C-4537-9467-D74B0982F587@nokia.com>
References: <CE913D4A-891C-4537-9467-D74B0982F587@nokia.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
Message-Id: <CD2259ED-72CB-40BF-98D0-0A8094E570B3@nokia.com>
From: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 20:15:50 -0400
To: tsvwg WG <tsvwg@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2007 00:15:59.0433 (UTC) FILETIME=[93271B90:01C80552]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8de5f93cb2b4e3bee75302e9eacc33db
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, draft-larsen-tsvwg-port-randomization@tools.ietf.org, DCCP mailing list <dccp@ietf.org>
Subject: [tcpm] Re: [Tsvwg] consensus call: draft-larsen-tsvwg-port-randomization to WG item
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0940399146=="
Errors-To: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org
Hi, my reading of the list discussion is that we do have consensus for TSVWG to take this on this work item with draft-larsen-tsvwg-port- randomization as the basis, i.e., option (1) below. Authors: Please submit the next revision as draft-ietf-tsvwg-port- randomization-00 with a target of Proposed Standard. You should also review the comments that have been made on the list and incorporate them into the revision. For example, several people suggested that the document should more prominently recommend one randomization scheme (or a small number of alternatives). The analysis of the pros and cons of currently implemented schemes that is the bulk of the current document should maybe become an informative appendix. DCCP & TCPM working groups: The continued discussion around this draft will occur on the TSVWG list only, to minimize cross-posting. There will be a joint WG last call eventually, but please participate in the ongoing discussion on TSVWG until then. On 2007-9-12, at 11:38, ext Lars Eggert wrote: > Please comment on the tsvwg@ietf.org list (reply-to set > accordingly), even if you have already commented be on this draft > in the past. > > To make it easy for your chairs, please start your email by > choosing ONE of the options below, followed by any detailed > comments you'd like to make: > > (1) TSVWG should take on this work item, with this document as > the basis > (2) TSVWG should take on this work item, but NOT with this > document as the basis > (3) TSVWG should NOT take on this work item > (4) don't care Lars
_______________________________________________ tcpm mailing list tcpm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm