Valery Smyslov writes:
> one potential problem, that I want to be resolved, is the status of
> this document.
>
> Currently it is an Informational document, since it doesn't define
> any protocol (and in fact it doesn't even have any RFC 2119
> language). But it updates RFC 7296, which is a Standa
Hi Paul,
thank you for your review. Please, see inline.
> > Subject: [IPsec] WGLC for draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-rename-esn
>
> I am in favour of adoption and have reviewed the document. Thanks to Valery
> for
> writing this draft.
>
> Comments:
>
> I don't like the phrase "Transform ID 0" beca
Hi,
one potential problem, that I want to be resolved, is the status of this
document.
Currently it is an Informational document, since it doesn't define any protocol
(and in fact it doesn't even have any RFC 2119 language). But it updates RFC
7296,
which is a Standards Track document.
I'm a
> On Dec 6, 2024, at 06:38, Valery Smyslov wrote:
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> thank you for your review. Please, see inline.
>
>>> Subject: [IPsec] WGLC for draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-rename-esn
>>
>> I am in favour of adoption and have reviewed the document. Thanks to Valery
>> for
>> writing this draf
Hi Paul,
> > I'm unsure that this is the correct change too. To my ear, the new
> > text implies that there was a possibility in the protocol to notify
> > the sender, but for some reason it wasn't happen. Instead, the current
> > text tries to say that currently there is no way to notify the send
This looks good. It is ready for the IESG.
Russ
> On Dec 5, 2024, at 7:17 PM, Tero Kivinen wrote:
>
> As we talked earlied when doing g-ikev2 IETF last call, the text
> talking about renaming ESN transform type got separated to this new
> draft, and this will start one (1) week working group
Greetings,
I have a several comments and suggestions for the proposed charter:
In paragraph 2, suggest adding (ipsecme) after "IPsec Maintenance and
Extensions Working Group" in second paragraph.
In the paragraph about PQC, I suggest replacing the first two sentences with
something more conci
+1; I expected to see an adoption call issued before Dublin after several folks
expressed support for a call (following
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/G-7lcrHXSm60gjvY4UupBCiBlwM/)
Rebecca
Rebecca Guthrie
she/her
Center for Cybersecurity Standards (CCSS)
Cybersecurity Collaboration
