Peter, Sean, thank you for the feedback. We will skip IETF 115 and will continue to work in the mailing list.
Regards, Valery. > Likewise on draft-ietf-uta-ciphersuites-in-sec-syslog, it seems like we are > getting enough of what we > need out of email to not warrant a session for it. > > Cheers, > spt > > > On Sep 21, 2022, at 16:12, Peter Saint-Andre <stpe...@stpeter.im> wrote: > > > > On 9/21/22 8:12 AM, Valery Smyslov wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> the chairs are unsure whether to request a session for UTA at IETF 115. > >> It seems to us that the current active WG documents are on the track > >> (with little discussions recently) and no new work was suggested. > > > > With regard to 6125bis: thanks to a pull request from Martin Thomson [1] > > we've been making progress > on text that will add checking for IP addresses (as agreed at IETF 114). I > expect that we'll be able to > submit an updated I-D in the next few weeks and that we can discuss these > changes on list. Right now I > don't think this will require meeting time at IETF 115, so I wouldn't suggest > that we request a session > only for this topic. > > > > Peter > > > > [1] https://github.com/richsalz/draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis/pull/54 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Uta mailing list > > Uta@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta _______________________________________________ Uta mailing list Uta@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
