IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-balanced-ipv6-security WGLC

Guillaume Leclanche <guillaume@leclanche.net> Tue, 12 November 2013 22:47 UTC

Return-Path: <guillaume@leclanche.net>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A905D21E8098 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:47:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TWojNQPampwZ for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:47:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ve0-x232.google.com (mail-ve0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c01::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D23321E8100 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:47:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ve0-f178.google.com with SMTP id jy13so2005699veb.23 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:47:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=leclanche.net; s=leclanche-net; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=gA8kQS2Bcd3H4DqpxvrYj7xdZ0XUBX4Xq3QrKHh0fgg=; b=XAudy8pbxiHNFZ7PMx9rYxsPJeIcN+BalSPxVrtGNn46UNKmzDJqMUSriMRg0I4tK3 +9vs4HoccxlXhg9YaHcI7GtCaocxU0qd6bWY3VVNHpOUqUXH0I/Fbelx3wF0l0kKQW9F HIeI776FdzHdsbolwCRlf2GJSjx2ijlUb4xnQ=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=gA8kQS2Bcd3H4DqpxvrYj7xdZ0XUBX4Xq3QrKHh0fgg=; b=TaH/aoJW7Nbu4eWlS1sUHzJ4c2idumqMcLA79N20ygCSsfNui+qmVzMeDLwhV4nwDX NrFQ7vVZUDcy/liS2vqg/KCkszquVu+56Se6OAXXrLuDKGxzrx/+pMZkS1iFl1/tP5EM 46+yXUNEzK8D0uDYJH92IDnx8L6tEi3UW/bxMYVrvijcikGNzUALkG127vO5hMtd3f6J S4y3HxMgwijAZadhnC9n9vmdXJwze+pnpeiq6iu9KJvBky6QD/HzKuklg4ereV6rfTK5 xvdre2E+yXhrZpf5nKHrsAzjC6JcQpv2p0q/VMcmOHHq6WwlnKr5Hegdavwf+Mvl8HEz IYpw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlx57uZ3AYXYIRGoXLv5/Gi+902uOW2OYDTJECxRA3T+63AY4XKTPm2MqDb1eHfPkI8PfMt
X-Received: by 10.52.227.6 with SMTP id rw6mr26546384vdc.19.1384296476309; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:47:56 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.58.24.200 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:47:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Originating-IP: [2620:0:230:c000:6e88:14ff:fe69:301c]
In-Reply-To: <CADDV1edHda2L6FHxRf1T1T4wM0tGjau_sUr==TAaLaiJRMHD+Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201311101900.rAAJ0AR6025350@irp-view13.cisco.com> <CAB0C4xOfz_JAjEEJZ-Zz7MBEyZhVzrAE+8Ghf1ggC3+9pyHmNg@mail.gmail.com> <989B8ED6-273E-45D4-BFD8-66A1793A1C9F@cisco.com> <CADDV1edHda2L6FHxRf1T1T4wM0tGjau_sUr==TAaLaiJRMHD+Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Guillaume Leclanche <guillaume@leclanche.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 17:47:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CADDV1edsq1-W1XNf79SQp4Z+t6h_CcD0Ejg0SWdeP2M5vhgrWw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e01161660bce79604eb02a333"
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-balanced-ipv6-security WGLC
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 22:47:57 -0000

>
> That way the documents "portfolio" would cover three possible default
> settings, that could be implemented as presets on CPEs: RFC9092,
> draft-balanced-security, draft-(strict?)-security. They are complementary.



obviously 6092 not 9092.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email