Hi!
> -Original Message-
> From: Benjamin Kaduk
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2020 12:58 PM
> To: Valery Smyslov
> Cc: Roman Danyliw ; 'The IESG' ;
> ipsec@ietf.org; ipsecme-cha...@ietf.org; david.walterm...@nist.gov; draft-
> ietf-ipsecme-qr-ik...@ietf.o
Hi Tom!
> -Original Message-
> From: tom petch
> Sent: Friday, October 30, 2020 7:14 AM
> To: Roman Danyliw ; Rafa Marin-Lopez
> Cc: i2...@ietf.org; Fernando Pereniguez-Garcia
> ; Gabriel Lopez ;
> ynir.i...@gmail.com; last-c...@ietf.org
> Subject: Re:
Hi Tero!
> -Original Message-
> From: IPsec On Behalf Of Tero Kivinen
> Sent: Friday, October 30, 2020 6:42 PM
> To: Roman Danyliw
> Cc: Fernando Pereniguez-Garcia ;
> i2...@ietf.org; Gabriel Lopez ; ynir.i...@gmail.com;
> ipsec@ietf.org; last-c...@ietf.org; Rafa Ma
Hi!
I performed a AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc8229bis-05. Thanks for
revising RFC8229 with this new guidance. Comments are below:
** The abstract notes that many of the document updates came from deployment
experience. I'm hoping to incorporate that feedback on a particular issue.
T
Hi!
I performed an AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-iptfs-12. Thank you for this
work and the patience of the WG in getting it processed.
I have a number of comments below, but the document is in good shape so please
process them concurrently with the IETF LC feedback.
** Thank you for getti
Hi!
I performed an AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-yang-iptfs-05. Thanks for this
complementary work to draft-ietf-ipsecme-iptfs. Feedback is below.
** Section 2. Editorial. s/ipsec/IPsec/
** Section 2. Typo. s/to fll/to fill/
** Section 2. Typo? Per "RFC [RFC9061] has a set of ", this st
> -Original Message-
> From: Roman Danyliw
> Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2022 5:20 PM
> To: ipsec@ietf.org WG
> Subject: AD Review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-iptfs-12
>
> Hi!
>
> I performed an AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-iptfs-12. Thank you for this
> work and the pa
Hi Don!
Thanks for the changes in -06.
To keep things moving, I'll start the IETF LC and we can handle my residual
feedback below concurrently.
> -Original Message-
> From: IPsec On Behalf Of Roman Danyliw
> Sent: Friday, May 6, 2022 4:25 PM
> To: ipsec@ietf.org WG
Hi!
I performed an AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev1-algo-to-historic-06.
Thanks for this work to formally move the community to IKEv2.
Based on the content of this document, I am assuming the WG intent is to follow
option #3 of
https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/designatin
Hi!
I performed an AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-mib-iptfs-03. Thanks for this
companion document to the YANG module for IP-TFS management. Below is my
feedback:
To the idea that this MIB is redrived from the YANG modules:
** Consider if you want to use the same names for field values. I'
Hi Don!
Thanks for all of the changes. I snipped all of the text where the -04
addressed the issue. A few more comments below.
I'm advancing the document to IETF LC.
> -Original Message-
> From: IPsec On Behalf Of Roman Danyliw
> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2022 2:27
Hi!
I performed an AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-multiple-ke-06. Thanks
for the work on this document.
Per the shepherd write-up:
** Question 4
Several implementors have been integral in developing this document, thus
implementors have indicated interest in implementing this. There i
Hi Adreas!
> -Original Message-
> From: IPsec On Behalf Of Andreas Steffen
> Sent: Saturday, October 1, 2022 7:29 AM
> To: Roman Danyliw ; ipsec@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-multiple-ke-06
>
> On 01.10.22 00:19
Hi!
From: CJ Tjhai
Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 9:05 PM
To: Roman Danyliw
Cc: Valery Smyslov ; ipsec@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-multiple-ke-06
Hi Roman,
Many thanks for the review, really appreciate it. We will update our draft and
submit a revision
Hi!
Thanks for the explanation and the revised text in -07. I’m advancing the
document to IETF LC.
I have a few replies to consider with any additional IETF LC feedback.
From: CJ Tjhai
Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 9:05 PM
To: Roman Danyliw
Cc: Valery Smyslov ; ipsec@ietf.org
Subject: Re
:08 AM
To: Roman Danyliw
Cc: Tero Kivinen ; Valery Smyslov ;
ipsec@ietf.org ; Valery Smyslov
Subject: Re: [IPsec] AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-multiple-ke-06
Hi Roman,
We have updated our draft to incorporate Russ' feedback and also changes from
IANA review. it also include
Hi!
From: IPsec On Behalf Of Warren Kumari
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2022 9:32 AM
To: Paul Wouters
Cc: The IESG ;
draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev1-algo-to-histo...@ietf.org; ipsecme-cha...@ietf.org;
ipsec@ietf.org; kivi...@iki.fi
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Warren Kumari's Discuss on
draft-ietf-ipsecme-i
Hi
I performed an AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-add-ike-08. Thanks for this
document. Below is my feedback:
** Section 3.1
Section 3.1.5 of
[I-D.ietf-add-dnr] lists a set of service parameters that are
recommended to be supported by implementations.
The referenced section in draft-ietf-add-d
Hi Med!
Thanks for merging the substance of the discussion triggered from AD review
into -09. I'm advancing the document.
Roman
> -Original Message-
> From: IPsec On Behalf Of
> mohamed.boucad...@orange.com
> Sent: Monday, February 27, 2023 11:10 AM
> To: R
Hi!
I conducted an AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-labeled-ipsec-09. Thanks for
the work on this document. I have a few editorial recommendations that can be
handled concurrently to IETF Last Call.
** Section 2.2. s/it MUST not install/it MUST NOT install/ since "MUST no" is
not a keyword
Hi!
I performed an AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-auth-announce-04. Thanks
for the work on this document. I have the following feedback:
** Section 3.1
If the initiator is configured to use Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP)
for authentication in IKEv2 (see Section 2.16 of [RFC7
Hi Valery!
Thanks for -05. Reducing the thread down to areas of discussion.
> -Original Message-
> From: Valery Smyslov
> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2023 11:51 AM
> To: 'Roman Danyliw' ; ipsec@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [IPsec] AD Review of draft-ietf-ipsec
Hi
I performed an AD review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-multi-sa-performance-05. I have
a mostly editorial feedback below:
** Abstract. Editorial. s/crypto/cryptography/
** Section 1.
Most IPsec implementations are currently limited to using one queue
or CPU resource for a Child SA.
-- (Ed
March 20, 2024 12:26 AM
> To: Roman Danyliw
> Cc: ipsec@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [IPsec] AD Review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-multi-sa-performance-05
>
> Warning: External Sender - do not click links or open attachments unless you
> recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-implicit-iv-07: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-qr-ikev2-10: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-intermediate-09: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however
Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-g-ikev2-21: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer to
Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-qr-alt-08: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
29 matches
Mail list logo
