IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] RFC Number for draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960bis

tuexen@fh-muenster.de Tue, 12 April 2022 17:28 UTC

Return-Path: <tuexen@fh-muenster.de>
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 823323A11C4 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 10:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.058
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.058 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.186, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WrsoOyvZMQqp for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 10:28:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from drew.franken.de (mail-n.franken.de [193.175.24.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B56D53A11BC for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 10:28:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a02:8109:1140:c3d:1cbc:f92b:5b24:8c8e]) (Authenticated sender: macmic) by mail-n.franken.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0460B721E2808; Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:28:29 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_498D34B3-5EC8-435E-8BFD-62CA05099EED"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.80.82.1.1\))
From: tuexen@fh-muenster.de
In-Reply-To: <5B1B5866-F68D-4B06-9AE6-67592128CF12@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:28:29 +0200
Cc: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>, Sandy Ginoza <sginoza@amsl.com>, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>, RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <483103B1-E930-4EE9-91A8-1B84645F3E9D@fh-muenster.de>
References: <CAM4esxQOzOWWS8Z_tfSimsDDYXdY2x=5ERp0Mq-2HPq5UL4dog@mail.gmail.com> <077790D6-F448-4DD9-AE4F-6B2F17B615F4@amsl.com> <CAM4esxTk9n1Z-n76JVF9YnP8rtkZfOc5cp3XTFkQ4G-2S71aHA@mail.gmail.com> <5B1B5866-F68D-4B06-9AE6-67592128CF12@ericsson.com>
To: Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.80.82.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/lGE7AWovj5yWGHfsHt-yWE9MaMw>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] RFC Number for draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960bis
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 17:28:41 -0000

> On 12. Apr 2022, at 12:48, Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> I guess we could go for 9260 if not already taken…?
That is the number currently being used for the document...

Best regards
Michael
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: tsvwg <tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
> Date: Tuesday, 12. April 2022 at 02:57
> To: Sandy Ginoza <sginoza@amsl.com>
> Cc: Michael Tuexen <tuexen@fh-muenster.de>, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>, RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
> Subject: Re: [tsvwg] RFC Number for draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc4960bis
>  
> Ok, thanks. 
>  
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2022, 16:16 Sandy Ginoza <sginoza@amsl.com> wrote:
>> Hi Martin,
>> 
>> We are unable to accommodate this request, as 9460 is a 200+ number jump from the range in which we are currently assigning.  It’s not ideal as it would take us 9 months to a year to close the gap. 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Sandy 
>> 
>> 
>> > On Apr 8, 2022, at 11:12 AM, Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 
>> > Hello RFC Editor,
>> > 
>> > This document is the third in a series, succeeding RFCs 2960 and 4960.
>> > 
>> > Would it be possible to assign this document 9460?
>> > 
>> > Thanks
>> > Martin Duke
>> > TSV AD
>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email