I'm sorry, Med. I missed your original note. We'll apply as suggested.
Eliot
On 23.04.2024 08:40, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote:
Hi all,
Like Michael, I'm puzzled about the development of this draft.
I raised comments back in 05/2021 that I reiterated during the call for
adoption:
ht
Hi all,
I support the progress of these drafts as key pieces for facilitating service
automation.
Best regards
Luis
De: OPSAWG En nombre de Joe Clarke (jclarke)
Enviado el: viernes, 19 de abril de 2024 16:41
Para: opsawg@ietf.org
CC: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling Discussion L
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-tls13-07.txt is now available. It is a
work item of the Operations and Management Area Working Group (OPSAWG) WG of
the IETF.
Title: TACACS+ TLS 1.3
Authors: Thorsten Dahm
John Heasley
Douglas C. Medway Gash
Andrej
Dear OPSAWG, Mohamed,
This attest revision intends to address the majority of the issues raised in
the last round of review (Thanks to Med)
There is one known outstanding issue at this time, to update the TLS
Identification with reference to RFC 9525. We plan to include that, and
revisions re
Thanks for the quick responses and push on this draft. And thank you, Med for
stepping up to shepherd. FYI, we have asked for a review from TSVART at Med’s
request to see what the appetite is for a dedicated port allocation.
Joe
From: OPSAWG on behalf of Douglas Gash (dcmgash)
Date: Tuesda
A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Joe Clarke, a Chair
of the OPSAWG Working Group.
-
Working Group Name: Operations and Management Area Working Group
Area Name: Operations and Management Area
Session Requester: Joe
Hi Doug,
Thank you for the updates. Looks good to me.
Noted the pending point about 9525, though.
One minor comment about the description in Section 7, I suggest to update
"Description: Login Host Protocol (TACACSS)" to mention TLS or "secure" in the
description to differentiate the new entry
Hello, WG. The request to schedule 120 meetings has just gone out to the
chairs. We’ll be planning to meet in Vancouver (this time for our usual 2
hours).
This is not a call for presentations yet. But we want to plant the seed early
with people who think they might want to present. Get your
Will do. Would it be beneficial to enact an immediate new version upload for
this?
From: mohamed.boucad...@orange.com
Date: Tuesday, 23 April 2024 at 16:05
To: Douglas Gash (dcmgash) , opsawg@ietf.org
Cc: Andrej Ota , John Heasley , Thorsten
Dahm
Subject: RE: Confirm submission of I-D draft-
Some comments on the latest draft:
2.1. Obfuscation
... The algorithm is categorized as Obfuscation in Section 10.5.2 of
[RFC8907]. The term should be interpreted to mean "plaintext"
I wouldn't call it "plaintext", as it's not. Perhaps instead just drop the
"interpreted to mean pl
Re-,
This can wait unless the Chairs are planning to apply for an early port/service
request SOON.
Cheers,
Med
Orange Restricted
De : Douglas Gash (dcmgash)
Envoyé : mardi 23 avril 2024 17:16
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET ; opsawg@ietf.org
Cc : Andrej Ota ; John Heasley ; Thorsten
Dahm
Hi Alan,
Please see one comment inline.
Cheers,
Med
> -Message d'origine-
> De : OPSAWG De la part de Alan DeKok
> Envoyé : mardi 23 avril 2024 17:20
> À : opsawg
> Objet : Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-tls13-
> 07.txt
>
>
> Some comments on the latest draft:
Eliot Lear wrote:
> On 22.04.2024 19:29, Michael Richardson wrote:
>> 0) Why is this document still kicking around the WG?
>> (Too bad it doesn't have the word "mud" in the filename.)
>>
>> 1) I find the title confusing.
>>
>> 2) I don't think that AUGMENT does what yo
13 matches
Mail list logo
