Hi all, We have removed mention of [IEEE_802.11-2024]. Please note that this means there will be no citation or informational reference to the document itself; the reference to the IEEE_802.11 WG ([IEEE_802.11]) remains.
You can view the updated files here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.xml https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.txt https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.pdf https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.html Diffs highlighting the most recent change only: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-lastdiff.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-lastrfcdiff.html AUTH48 diff: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-auth48diff.html Comprehensive diffs: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-diff.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-rfcdiff.html Please confirm you approve the RFC for publication. Thank you, RFC Editor/sg > On Dec 6, 2024, at 5:55 AM, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 06, 2024 at 8:46 AM, Dan Harkins <daniel.hark...@hpe.com> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > Yes, I confirm. I'm fine publishing without the DOI. > > > > Yah, me too! > W > > > > > regards, > > > > Dan. > > > > -- > > "the object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to > > escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." – Marcus Aurelius > > > > On 12/5/24, 10:12 PM, "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyn...@cisco.com> wrote: > > > > Sandy, > > > > I think that the IETF should not wait anymore for the IEEE actual > publication, let’s publish RFC 9672 even without the DOI for the IEEE 802.11 > Std 2024. > > > > Dan, Warren can you confirm our latest discussion on the above point ? > > > > Now, if the RFC editor policy is to wait until the DOI is available, then > let’s wait. > > > > Regards, > > > > -éric > > > > From: Sandy Ginoza <sgin...@amsl.com> > Date: Tuesday, 12 November 2024 at 18:20 > To: Harkins, Dan <daniel.hark...@hpe.com> > Cc: Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net>, RFC Editor > <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org>, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyn...@cisco.com>, > auth48archive@rfc-ed <auth48archive@rfc-editor.org> > Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9672 <draft-wkumari-rfc8110-to-ieee-02> for > your review > > Hi Dan, > > Thanks for your reply. We updated the text in the Introduction. Note that > we also added a placeholder for an informative reference to IEEE Std > 802.11-2024. We will wait to hear further regarding publication of that > document. > > The current files are available here: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.xml > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.txt > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.pdf > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.html > > Diffs highlighting the most recent updates only: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-lastdiff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-lastrfcdiff.html > > AUTH48 diff: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-auth48diff.html > > Comprehensive diffs: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-diff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-rfcdiff.html > > Thank you, > RFC Editor/sg > > > > > On Nov 7, 2024, at 8:21 AM, Harkins, Dan <daniel.hark...@hpe.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Sandy, > > > > Yes, that update to section 1 looks great! Thanks. > > > > regards, > > > > Dan. > > > > -- > > "the object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to > > escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." – Marcus Aurelius > > > > On 11/7/24, 7:17 AM, "Sandy Ginoza" <sgin...@amsl.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > Thanks for your input and for checking on the DOI. > > > > For the update to section 1, would this work? > > > > The IEEE 802.11 Working Group [IEEE_802.11] has requested the ability to > > maintain and develop OWE (see [IEEE_LS]) to ensure that the protocol > > remains in sync with the IEEE protocols. This document represents > > concurrence that future work on OWE [RFC8110] will now occur in > > the IEEE 802.11 Working Group. > > > > Thanks, > > RFC Editor/sg > > > > > >> On Nov 4, 2024, at 12:04 PM, Harkins, Dan <daniel.hark...@hpe.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> Hi Sandy (et al), > >> > >> I approve of publication. I do have a minor gripe regarding this change to > >> section 1: > >> > >>> > >>> Original: > >>> [IEEE_802.11] has requested [IEEE_LS] that in order to allow for ongoing > >>> maintenance and further development of the protocol, and to ensure that > >>> the protocol remains in sync with the IEEE protocols, future work on the > >>> protocol described in RFC8110 will now occur in > >>> [IEEE_802.11]. This document is a concurrence. > >>> > >>> Perhaps: > >>> The IEEE 802.11 Working Group [IEEE_802.11] has requested the ability to > >>> maintain and develop OWE (see [IEEE_LS]). This document represents > >>> concurrence that future work on OWE [RFC8110] will now occur in > >>> the IEEE 802.11 Working Group to ensure that the protocol remains in sync > >>> with the IEEE protocols. > >>> > >> > >> I actually think the original here is better because it is the further > >> development of the protocol in IEEE that would cause the loss of sync. So > >> I think it's better to have those two things-- the cause of the result > >> that we want to avoid-- connected. Maybe, "The IEEE 802.11 Working Group > >> [IEEE_802.11] has requested that ongoing maintenance and development of > >> the protocol be done in IEEE 802.11 in order to ensure the protocol > >> remains in sync with other IEEE protocols. This document is a concurrence." > >> > >> But this is not a hill I care fight on much less die on, so I will defer > >> to you. The similar change to section 2 looks fine though but I'd like to > >> see this text in section 1 have these two things more connected. > >> > >> I'm going to the IEEE meeting next week and will inquire about a DOI for > >> IEEE Std 802.11-2024. Hopefully it will be soon. > >> > >> regards, > >> > >> Dan. > >> > >> -- > >> "the object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to > >> escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." – Marcus Aurelius > >> > >> On 10/29/24, 1:34 PM, "Sandy Ginoza" <sgin...@amsl.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Warren, Dan, > >> > >> Regarding the following comment: > >> > >>> The only outstanding issue is that the IEEE stated that: "On September > >>> 26, 2024, the IEEE SASB approved P802.11REVme/D7.0 to be published as > >>> IEEE Std 802.11-2024. It is currently in publication editing and I expect > >>> it will be available to the public in a month or two." and "Since IEEE > >>> Std 802.11-2024 has been approved for publication, it can now be > >>> referenced." > >>> > >>> But I don't think that it is actually published yet , and so does not > >>> have a DOI number. I believe that the RFC Editor would prefer a more > >>> formal reference (e.g with DOI) — as an example, RFC9542 references > >>> 802.1AB as: > >>> [IEEE802.1AB] > >>> IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area > >>> networks - Station and Media Access Control Connectivity > >>> Discovery", IEEE Std 802.1AB-2016, > >>> DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2016.7433915, March 2016, > >>> > >>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEESTD.2016.7433915__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhZmV4584$ > >>> >. > >>> > >>> So, I'm not sure if we should wait till IEEE Std 802.11-2024 has a DOI, > >>> or if it's fine without, or what you'd prefer. > >>> > >>> I have no opinion, so "I approve this RFC for publication" and do > >>> whatever you want with the above reference issue[0]. > >> > >> This document does not contain a reference to the IEEE standard - > >> references to [IEEE_802.11] are to the WG. Perhaps an in-text citation > >> was intended in the following: > >> > >> Opportunistic Wireless Encryption (OWE) [RFC8110] is a mode of > >> opportunistic security [RFC7435] for IEEE Std 802.11 that provides > >> encryption of the wireless medium without authentication. > >> > >> > >> If a reference is to be included, should it be listed as normative or > >> informative? Assuming a reference is to be included, we would prefer to > >> wait for publication. > >> > >> This is the status listed on > >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ieee802.org/11/__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhNLJqMxs$ > >> >: > >> IEEE Std 802.11™-2024 was approved on September 26, 2024. Publication > >> expected soon. > >> > >> > >> Dan, we don’t believe we have heard from you regarding this document’s > >> readiness for publication. Please review and let us know if updates are > >> needed. > >> > >> We updated the document as indicated below and posted the revised files > >> here: > >> > >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.xml__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhemumOJ0$ > >> > >> > >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.txt__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhMPVWfnY$ > >> > >> > >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.pdf__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhKedDuJ0$ > >> > >> > >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.html__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhRMGgtFI$ > >> > >> > >> AUTH48 diff: > >> > >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-auth48diff.html__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMh2Jpf3yg$ > >> > >> > >> Comprehensive diffs: > >> > >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-diff.html__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMh_0Is6LM$ > >> > >> > >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-rfcdiff.html__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhC03tSoM$ > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Sandy > >> > >>> On Oct 24, 2024, at 9:26 AM, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 7:52 PM, Sandy Ginoza <sgin...@amsl.com> wrote: > >>> Hi Warren, > >>> > >>> Thanks for your note about the IEEE.11-2024 reference - we are reviewing. > >>> > >>> I don’t believe we have received a reply regarding the following items. > >>> Please review and let us know if we may update the text. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Doh, sorry. Approved, and thanks! > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> 1) <!-- [rfced] Section 1: We are having trouble parsing this text. > >>> Please consider whether the suggested text correctly conveys the intended > >>> meaning. > >>> > >>> Original: > >>> [IEEE_802.11] has requested [IEEE_LS] that in order to allow for ongoing > >>> maintenance and further development of the protocol, and to ensure that > >>> the protocol remains in sync with the IEEE protocols, future work on the > >>> protocol described in RFC8110 will now occur in > >>> [IEEE_802.11]. This document is a concurrence. > >>> > >>> Perhaps: > >>> The IEEE 802.11 Working Group [IEEE_802.11] has requested the ability to > >>> maintain and develop OWE (see [IEEE_LS]). This document represents > >>> concurrence that future work on OWE [RFC8110] will now occur in > >>> the IEEE 802.11 Working Group to ensure that the protocol remains in sync > >>> with the IEEE protocols. > >>> --> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> LGTM! > >>> > >>> > >>> 2) <!-- [rfced] Section 2: If the update above is accepted, may we make a > >>> similar change here? > >>> > >>> Original: > >>> At the request of [IEEE_802.11], in order to allow for ongoing > >>> maintenance and further development of the protocol, and to ensure that > >>> the protocol remains in sync with the IEEE protocols, this document > >>> specifies that future work on the protocol described in RFC8110 will now > >>> occur in [IEEE_802.11]. > >>> > >>> The protocol defined in RFC8110 will be duplicated in [IEEE_802.11] such > >>> that that document alone will be enough to implement it and any further > >>> maintenance or modification of the protocol will be performed in IEEE > >>> under its policies and procedures. > >>> > >>> Perhaps: > >>> This document represents concurrence that future work on OWE [RFC8110] > >>> will now occur in the IEEE 802.11 Working Group [IEEE_802.11] to ensure > >>> that the protocol remains in sync with the IEEE protocols. > >>> > >>> The OWE protocol [RFC8110] will be duplicated by the IEEE 802.11 Working > >>> Group [IEEE_802.11] such that the document alone will be enough to > >>> implement, maintain, and modify the protocol within the IEEE under its > >>> policies and procedures. > >>> --> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> LGTM. > >>> > >>> Thank you! > >>> W > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Thank you, > >>> RFC Editor/sg > >>> > >>> On Oct 18, 2024, at 12:51 PM, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote: > >>> > >>> Inline…. > >>> > >>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 4:56 PM, <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > >>> *****IMPORTANT***** > >>> > >>> Updated 2024/10/11 > >>> > >>> RFC Author(s): > >>> -------------- > >>> > >>> Instructions for Completing AUTH48 > >>> > >>> Your document has now entered AUTH48. Once it has been reviewed and > >>> approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC. If an > >>> author is no longer available, there are several remedies available as > >>> listed in the FAQ > >>> (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMh7mdbDnE$ > >>> ). > >>> > >>> You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties > >>> (e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing your > >>> approval. > >>> > >>> Planning your review > >>> --------------------- > >>> > >>> Please review the following aspects of your document: > >>> > >>> * RFC Editor questions > >>> > >>> Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor that > >>> have been included in the XML file as comments marked as follows: > >>> > >>> <!-- [rfced] ... --> > >>> > >>> These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email. > >>> > >>> * Changes submitted by coauthors > >>> > >>> Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your coauthors. We > >>> assume that if you do not speak up that you agree to changes submitted by > >>> your coauthors. > >>> > >>> * Content > >>> > >>> Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot change > >>> once the RFC is published. Please pay particular attention to: > >>> - IANA considerations updates (if applicable) > >>> - contact information > >>> - references > >>> > >>> * Copyright notices and legends > >>> > >>> Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in RFC 5378 and > >>> the Trust Legal Provisions > >>> (TLP – > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhA89-Luo$ > >>> ). > >>> > >>> * Semantic markup > >>> > >>> Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements of > >>> content are correctly tagged. For example, ensure that <sourcecode> and > >>> <artwork> are set correctly. See details at > >>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhtz4Ncf0$ > >>> >. > >>> > >>> * Formatted output > >>> > >>> Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the formatted > >>> output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is reasonable. > >>> Please note that the TXT will have formatting limitations compared to the > >>> PDF and HTML. > >>> > >>> Submitting changes > >>> ------------------ > >>> > >>> To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as all > >>> the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The parties > >>> include: > >>> > >>> * your coauthors > >>> > >>> * rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org (the RPC team) > >>> > >>> * other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g., IETF Stream > >>> participants are your working group chairs, the responsible ADs, and the > >>> document shepherd). > >>> > >>> * auth48archive@rfc-editor.org, which is a new archival mailing list to > >>> preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion list: > >>> > >>> * More info: > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhk2LNzgM$ > >>> > >>> > >>> * The archive itself: > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMh-jmd0b4$ > >>> > >>> > >>> * Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt out of the > >>> archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive matter). If needed, > >>> please add a note at the top of the message that you have dropped the > >>> address. When the discussion is concluded, auth48archive@rfc-editor.org > >>> will be re-added to the CC list and its addition will be noted at the top > >>> of the message. > >>> > >>> You may submit your changes in one of two ways: > >>> > >>> An update to the provided XML file > >>> — OR — > >>> An explicit list of changes in this format > >>> > >>> Section # (or indicate Global) > >>> > >>> OLD: > >>> old text > >>> > >>> NEW: > >>> new text > >>> > >>> No changes, thank you very much, RFC Ed. > >>> > >>> The only outstanding issue is that the IEEE stated that: "On September > >>> 26, 2024, the IEEE SASB approved P802.11REVme/D7.0 to be published as > >>> IEEE Std 802.11-2024. It is currently in publication editing and I expect > >>> it will be available to the public in a month or two." and "Since IEEE > >>> Std 802.11-2024 has been approved for publication, it can now be > >>> referenced." > >>> > >>> But I don't think that it is actually published yet , and so does not > >>> have a DOI number. I believe that the RFC Editor would prefer a more > >>> formal reference (e.g with DOI) — as an example, RFC9542 references > >>> 802.1AB as: > >>> [IEEE802.1AB] > >>> IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks - Station > >>> and Media Access Control Connectivity Discovery", IEEE Std 802.1AB-2016, > >>> DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2016.7433915, March 2016, > >>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEESTD.2016.7433915__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhZmV4584$ > >>> >. > >>> > >>> So, I'm not sure if we should wait till IEEE Std 802.11-2024 has a DOI, > >>> or if it's fine without, or what you'd prefer. > >>> > >>> I have no opinion, so "I approve this RFC for publication" and do > >>> whatever you want with the above reference issue[0]. > >>> > >>> W > >>> [0]: That sounded snarky, but no snark intended… > >>> You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an explicit > >>> list of changes, as either form is sufficient. > >>> > >>> We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that seem > >>> beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of text, > >>> and technical changes. Information about stream managers can be found in > >>> the FAQ. Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream manager. > >>> > >>> Approving for publication > >>> -------------------------- > >>> > >>> To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email stating > >>> that you approve this RFC for publication. Please use ‘REPLY ALL’, as all > >>> the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval. > >>> > >>> Files > >>> ----- > >>> > >>> The files are available here: > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.xml__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhemumOJ0$ > >>> > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.html__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhRMGgtFI$ > >>> > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.pdf__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhKedDuJ0$ > >>> > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672.txt__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhMPVWfnY$ > >>> > >>> > >>> Diff file of the text: > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-diff.html__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMh_0Is6LM$ > >>> > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-rfcdiff.html__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhC03tSoM$ > >>> (side by side) > >>> > >>> Diff of the XML: > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9672-xmldiff1.html__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhegGI5WU$ > >>> > >>> > >>> Tracking progress > >>> ----------------- > >>> > >>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here: > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9672__;!!NpxR!jnakUaRvodfLmxupOdc0phBycK1YTKkEKUbUhXX-1ccu6JLqdEIbNqY1NSkDJBDH1CxaoQMhPGaPN3Q$ > >>> > >>> > >>> Please let us know if you have any questions. > >>> > >>> Thank you for your cooperation, > >>> > >>> RFC Editor > >>> > >>> -------------------------------------- > >>> RFC 9672 (draft-wkumari-rfc8110-to-ieee-02) > >>> > >>> Title : Transferring Opportunistic Wireless Encryption to the IEEE 802.11 > >>> Working Group Author(s) : W. Kumari, D. Harkins WG Chair(s) : > >>> Area Director(s) : > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
