Steffen Klassert <steffen.klass...@secunet.com> wrote:
>> Hi, with some help from Carsten and his uplift tools, I have converted
>> RFC4301 and RFC4303 to markdown. They are at:
>> https://github.com/mcr/rfc4301bis
>>
>> I recognize that we aren't going with Internet Standard work at this
>> time.
>>
>> But I also learnt from watching the 121 recordings that ESPv3 would
>> ideally be based upon RFC4303. So, here is a copy in markdown.
>>
>> I find it odd to consider raising 4303 to IS, while we are also doing
>> v3. Or maybe it's just me that's odd.
> Agreed. Maybe it is just not the right time for this. It might be
> better to wait on the outcome of the discussion about an ESP update
> and/or new security protocol. Otherwise we might end up with having and
> old version raised to IS.
Any new document would take at least a year to get to RFC, then at least
another year or two to get clearly tested implementations. Then we'd have to
revise the RFC (probably). There is a usual two year delay between PS and IS.
It's just that we'd have one document at IS, already have a kind of successor
at PS. It might seem hard for industry to understand.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list -- ipsec@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ipsec-le...@ietf.org
