I support adoption.
On 2025-02-24 17:57, Michael Richardson wrote:
Tero Kivinen wrote:
> This email starts two week working group adoption call for
> draft-antony-ipsecme-iekv2-beet-mode [1] document. If you are in favor
I read it back in November, and I support adoption.
> of
Daniel Migault wrote:
> I am confident that we can adopt both documents. I trust that the teams
can
> collaborate to establish the most common format, and if necessary,
> ultimately merge the documents.
I'm not at all sure that there is any content to merge.
I'm also not convinced t
I support adoption of the draft.
On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 7:53 AM Valery Smyslov
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I support adoption (disclaimer - I'm a co-author).
>
> On the other hand, I hope that adoption call(s) for PQ KEMs are started
> soon
> (draft-kampanakis-ml-kem-ikev2, draft-wang-hybrid-kem-ikev2-fro
Tero Kivinen wrote:
> We have draft-colitti-ipsecme-esp-ping [1] and
> draft-antony-ipsecme-encrypted-esp-ping [2] both of which propose ESP
> ping, but on the different level, and each of those provide different
> level of debugging capabilities.
I have read both.
> The que
Tero Kivinen wrote:
> This email will start two week working group adoption call for
> draft-reddy-ipsecme-ikev2-pqc-auth document. If you are in favor of
> adopting this document for the initial work document for the PQC auth
> work item, reply this email. And especially if you h
I am confident that we can adopt both documents. I trust that the teams can
collaborate to establish the most common format, and if necessary,
ultimately merge the documents.
Yours,
Daniel
On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 4:00 AM Antony Antony wrote:
> Hi Tero,
>
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 04:49:15PM +02
Tero Kivinen wrote:
> This email starts two week working group adoption call for
> draft-antony-ipsecme-iekv2-beet-mode [1] document. If you are in favor
I read it back in November, and I support adoption.
> of adoption this document as working group document, please reply to
>
Hi,
draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-rename-esn-04 is in the RFC Editor queue now. It
has already passed IANA review
and the IANA actions listed in the draft were confirmed by the author (me).
However, in the process of IANA review of the G-IKEv2 draft, it came to
light that some needed IANA actions were
Hi Tero,
On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 04:49:15PM +0200, Tero Kivinen wrote:
> We have draft-colitti-ipsecme-esp-ping [1] and
> draft-antony-ipsecme-encrypted-esp-ping [2] both of which propose ESP
> ping, but on the different level, and each of those provide different
> level of debugging capabilities.
On Feb 24, 2025, at 03:15, Valery Smyslov wrote:
>
>
> Since formally these are technical changes to the document that has already
> passed all
> last calls and is in the RFC Editor queue, Tero and Deb asked me to inform
> the WG
> about the proposed changes. If anybody disagree with the propose
10 matches
Mail list logo
