[tsvwg] draft-tuexen-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps
"Scheffenegger, Richard" <rs@netapp.com> Sat, 10 November 2012 00:59 UTC
Return-Path: <rs@netapp.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD6D521F8B6F for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 16:59:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.521
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.521 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.078, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M3QtbD6rRrOw for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 16:59:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx2.netapp.com (mx2.netapp.com [216.240.18.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C5B721F8B6D for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 16:59:57 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,749,1344236400"; d="scan'208";a="708802314"
Received: from smtp1.corp.netapp.com ([10.57.156.124]) by mx2-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 09 Nov 2012 16:59:56 -0800
Received: from vmwexceht01-prd.hq.netapp.com (exchsmtp.hq.netapp.com [10.106.76.239]) by smtp1.corp.netapp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/NTAP-1.6) with ESMTP id qAA0xuIF015806; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 16:59:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SACEXCMBX04-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([169.254.6.195]) by vmwexceht01-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.76.239]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 16:59:56 -0800
From: "Scheffenegger, Richard" <rs@netapp.com>
To: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>, "randall@lakerest.net" <randall@lakerest.net>
Thread-Topic: draft-tuexen-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps
Thread-Index: Ac2+3hoXwQGNduo8RnSgAmzi32t2WA==
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 00:59:55 +0000
Message-ID: <012C3117EDDB3C4781FD802A8C27DD4F0D767632@SACEXCMBX04-PRD.hq.netapp.com>
Accept-Language: de-AT, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.104.60.115]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Subject: [tsvwg] draft-tuexen-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tsvwg>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 00:59:57 -0000
Hi, While reading this draft, it felt more like a Info or BCP draft rather than a STD track RFC... (overall, this draft can be paraphrased "Be sensible when using SCTP over DTLS"). Apart from the obvious loose ends (dependencies on not-yet-adopted drafts) there is also this one loose end 5.7, multiplexing large chunks. IMHO this makes it hard, at this stage, to proceed with this draft on STD track; Having that said, I would still support adoption as a WG item... Best regards, Richard Scheffenegger
- [tsvwg] draft-tuexen-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps Scheffenegger, Richard
- Re: [tsvwg] draft-tuexen-tsvwg-sctp-dtls-encaps Michael Tuexen