[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: I-D.ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-09

To: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: I-D.ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-09
From: james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:09:28 -0700
In-reply-to: <4BA3D1B3.4010501@gmail.com>
References: <D6F5ACD2-EB43-477E-9F48-AC3EDB3F7EB4@apple.com> <4BA3BBCF.2090903@cisco.com> <4BA3D1B3.4010501@gmail.com>

On Mar 19, 2010, at 12:34, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> 
> So I want to say: let's not add *anything*. Let's just push it out in a matter of weeks.

I'm currently sitting on a couple of minor edits:

+ Cite RFC 4007 to clear up confusion about multicast group scope boundaries.
+ Fix some inconsistencies between cpe-simple-security and RFC 4890.

I'm planning to post the -10 revision tonight, then start revising my slides for Monday morning.  We shall see if there is a rough consensus for sending the -10 revision up the stack in the days following the meeting, or if further wrangling over it in the working group is in order.

--
james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>
member of technical staff, communications engineering

Follow-Ups:
- Re: I-D.ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-09
  - From: Mark Townsley <townsley@cisco.com>

References:
- I-D.ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-09
  - From: james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>
- Re: I-D.ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-09
  - From: Mark Townsley <townsley@cisco.com>
- Re: I-D.ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-09
  - From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>

Prev by Date: Re: I-D.ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-09
Next by Date: Re: RFC 5006 status
Previous by thread: Re: I-D.ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-09
Next by thread: Re: I-D.ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-09
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread