Hi Tom, We are in the process of refreshing all the drafts that have expired.
Cheers. > On Feb 19, 2019, at 5:55 PM, tom petch <ie...@btconnect.com> wrote: > > Jeff > > Two of the three I-D you mention have timed out and are not available > through the usual channels. > > I suggest that the first step needs to be a refresh so that they are > available. > > (Yes, I know I can jump through hoops and find obsoleted I-Ds but life > is too short:-) > > Tom Petch > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeffrey Haas" <jh...@pfrc.org> > To: <rtg-bfd@ietf.org> > Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2019 5:07 PM >> Working Group, >> >> On March 28, 2018, we started Working Group Last Call on the following > document >> bundle: >> >> draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers >> draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication >> draft-ietf-bfd-stability >> >> The same day, Mahesh Jethanandani acknowledged there was pending IPR >> declarations against these drafts. An IPR declaration was finally > posted on >> November 1, 2018. In particular, it notes a patent. The licenseing > is >> RAND. >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3328/ >> >> In the time since the WGLC was requested, there were a number of > technical >> comments made on these drafts. It's my belief that all substantial >> technical comments had been addressed in the last posted version of > these >> documents. Note that there was one lingering comment about Yang >> considerations for the BFD module with regard to enabling this > optimized >> authentication mode which can be dealt with separably. >> >> The chairs did not carry out a further consensus call to ensure that > there >> are no further outstanding technical issues. >> >> On November 21, Greg Mirsky indicated an objection to progressing the >> document due to late disclosure. >> >> > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/u8rvWwvDWRKI3jseGHecAB9WtD > o >> >> Since we are a little over a month prior to the upcoming IETF 104, > this >> seems a good time to try to decide how the Working Group shall finish > this >> work. Since we are meeting in Prague, this may progress to microphone >> conversation. >> >> For the moment, the chairs' perceived status of the documents are: >> - No pending technical issues with the documents with one known issue. >> - Concerns over late disclosure of IPR. >> - No solid consensus from the Working Group that we're ready to > proceed. >> This part may be covered by a future consensus call, but let's hear > list >> discussion first. >> >> -- Jeff >> > Mahesh Jethanandani mjethanand...@gmail.com
