Subject: [Isms] next steps (please review the recent changes)

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 00:51:51 +0200

Hi,

I like to encourage you to review the recent changes of our
documents. Wes has put the prefix security name mapping into the
documents and I like to know whether everybody is happy with the
results. It would be nice to receive feedback in the next 10 days.

Dave Harrington has a number of editorial changes pending.  We
therefore plan for another revision of the documents by the end of
October and I plan to initiate WG last call on all documents at that
time (so please reserve some time to review all specs together at the
beginning of November).

We have a 1 hour session at the next IETF, currently scheduled for
Wednesday morning 10:30-11:30. If things go well, we will have our
documents done by the next IETF and we can either cancel the session
or if there is interest use the session to discuss any followup work
(e.g. TLS/DTLS transport models or VACM/Radius integration).

But for getting our charter items done, we need your reviews. So
please help. Thanks!

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
_______________________________________________
Isms mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 10:03:09 +0200

> results. It would be nice to receive feedback in the next 10 days.

A gentle reminder: please take a look at the drafts and let us know
whether you are fine with the way the name mapping works.

Thanks,

/js

---

From: "tom.petch" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 12:17:59 +0200

Juergen

Yes, I am definitely going to look .... but have a nightmare few weeks in front
of me so it will be 15th November rather than 15th October.  If they then end up
as WGLC comments, not ideal, then so be it.

Tom Petch

---

From: Wes Hardaker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:46:03 -0700

>>>>> On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 00:51:51 +0200, Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]> said:

JS> I like to encourage you to review the recent changes of our
JS> documents. Wes has put the prefix security name mapping into the
JS> documents and I like to know whether everybody is happy with the
JS> results. It would be nice to receive feedback in the next 10 days.

In particular it should be noted that the text is a bit different than
what was talked about on the list and in the meeting.  Instead of the TM
handing up a prefixed tmSecurityName it's entirely up to the TSM now to
add and remove the prefix.  This simplified the text of the TSM
processing and made it a bit more clear and really really simplified the
SSH and DTLS drafts so from a documentation point of view it's a lot
cleaner.  We should have all listened to Juergen when he suggested this
approach a while back ;-)
-- 
Wes Hardaker
Sparta, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Isms mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms