[tsvwg] Feedback after IETF-113: Should draft-ietf-tsvwg-dtls-over-sctp-bis obsolete RFC 6083?

Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Mon, 09 May 2022 09:47 UTC

Return-Path: <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
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 76214C14F612; Mon, 9 May 2022 02:47:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.888
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.888 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y-VaxYmxEfTT; Mon, 9 May 2022 02:47:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk [137.50.19.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F818C157B43; Mon, 9 May 2022 02:47:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.64] (fgrpf.plus.com [212.159.18.54]) by pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 428981B0069F; Mon, 9 May 2022 10:46:40 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <f0ace3e8-83e7-f72f-5956-34a3dbed1774@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2022 10:46:39 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1
To: "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Cc: "tsvwg-chairs@ietf.org" <tsvwg-chairs@ietf.org>, tuexen@fh-muenster.de, Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
References: <2df510e2-bde3-893e-bb91-f8534c097261@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <42F31C5B-6144-42BA-9E87-3CFB742F7B71@fh-muenster.de> <PA4PR07MB8414BF9B0447020B8585F36D95C39@PA4PR07MB8414.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <FAB9E31C-E16F-4695-8741-2E5696281319@fh-muenster.de>
From: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <FAB9E31C-E16F-4695-8741-2E5696281319@fh-muenster.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/asDz6CstlSXV1WthsttQHfhQV0Y>
Subject: [tsvwg] Feedback after IETF-113: Should draft-ietf-tsvwg-dtls-over-sctp-bis obsolete RFC 6083?
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 09 May 2022 09:47:23 -0000

I noted additional on-list email about the proposal for progression that 
was presented at the Vienna IETF from those who participated at the meeting.

This email therefore reports the WG Chair's position:

1. draft-ietf-tsvwg-dtls-over-sctp-bis will continue as a TSVWG work 
item, targeting publication as a PS. This draft has declared IPR that 
will be considered as a part of the WGLC, along with technical aspects 
of the proposed specification and any experience from implementations.

2. The editors are requested to update 
draft-ietf-tsvwg-dtls-over-sctp-bis as soon as possible, so that this 
draft does not now propose to obsolete RFC 6083. They should ensure the 
update contains a section that allows a different draft to subsequently 
also update (and possibly obsolete) RFC 6083, and need to describe how 
future alternative specifications could co-exist.

3. A different draft that also seeks to update RFC 6083 could also be 
proposed and would seem suitable for future initial working group 
discussion.

4. The decision on whether to change the status of RFC 6083 might be 
discussed as a part of WGLC, if new information emerges.

Best wishes,

Gorry Fairhurst

(TSVWG Co-Chair)