IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] another review of draft-ietf-tcpm-tcpsecure[-10]

Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU> Tue, 30 September 2008 14:42 UTC

Return-Path: <tcpm-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tcpm-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tcpm-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A5D53A6B23; Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:42:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 078313A6B23 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:42:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.588
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.588 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.011, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZYL6GomNjH00 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:42:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vapor.isi.edu (vapor.isi.edu [128.9.64.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2340E3A6B1D for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:42:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [128.9.176.50] (c1-vpn11.isi.edu [128.9.176.50]) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m8UEgBn4001709 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:42:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <48E23AC3.50901@isi.edu>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:42:11 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
References: <200808140650.IAA05627@TR-Sys.de> <0C53DCFB700D144284A584F54711EC5805DF435A@xmb-sjc-21c.amer.cisco.com> <B35986E6-D8D7-4A9E-B8AB-3DB2E5C3FA29@nokia.com> <48E110DE.8050903@isi.edu> <724ED3DF-B4E5-4FF8-93BF-5B84688CC940@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <724ED3DF-B4E5-4FF8-93BF-5B84688CC940@nokia.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: Alfred HÎnes <ah@tr-sys.de>, tcpm@ietf.org, "ext Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)" <ananth@cisco.com>, rrs@cisco.com, "Mitesh Dalal (mdalal)" <mdalal@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] another review of draft-ietf-tcpm-tcpsecure[-10]
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/tcpm>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Lars Eggert wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> (individual hat on)
...
> My reason for suggesting to omit the "updates" - and this is a personal
> preference, I'll respect the WG decision and would like to head other
> opinions - is that a plain "updates 793" looks like a "you must
> implement this when implementing 793", and we had a long discussion
> around the applicability statement that seemed to indicate that the WG
> didn't want to make this blanket recommendation.
> 
> Lars

Right - that's the critical issue, and I agree with your conclusion.

Joe

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkjiOsMACgkQE5f5cImnZrvDHQCg79dDM84rcD4I8N9h2d0e7i6z
LaoAoO12Eiv400l8DPszv9GU1EUf0Djd
=u/IX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email