Subject: [OPSEC] Next task: draft-bhatia-manral-igp-crypto-requirements-04

From: joel jaeggli <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:42:34 -0800

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhatia-manral-igp-crypto-requirements-04

To briefly recounted the saga as I know it, it has been discussed on
this list before. Was presented in opsec first at ietf 74 with
significant group feedback, and resulted in a spirited discussion on
this list, including some extremely helpful commentary from RJ Atkinson
on the attack surface of the various currently in-use algorithms.
Subsequently the authors sought and received commentary from the
security ad's.

The resulting document is ready for testing of wg acceptance. It is my
understanding that the intended status of this document is informational.

Glen Kent noted his support for the  current document on 12/16.

Comment period will run 1 calender week 1/11-1/18

---

WG chair hat off,

I think the draft could  still use of tweaks to the overall tone before
it goes to last call, I see that value as guidance to implementors and
perhaps operators rather than as guidance to the routing area, the work
that will produce these protocol will necessarily occur separately from
this document itself.

 I have a significant hand in changes between draft 03 and draft 04 for
so I'm not entirely unbiased when it some to the current state, but I
think it's pretty good. use of lower chase should in terms of addressing
future requirements I think adequately conveys that this doucment
recommends protocol changes but is not itself imposing those
recommendations.

thanks
joel

---

From: Joel Jaeggli <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 10:37:22 -0800

Postive comments on the inclusion of this draft, were recieved from glen
kent 12/16 and Alfred Hines. Unlike the previous round of discussion on
this draft not comments to the contrary, were registered.

In light of ou declared intent to bring it to the list for acceptance at
the IETF 76 meeting it is plausible to conclude, that we should accept
this work as a working group item and ammed our milestones accordingly.
while the comment period has ended, anyone who believes otherwise should
please contact me.

Thank you
Joel

joel jaeggli wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> OPSEC mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
>