From dromasca@avaya.com Thu Feb 5 01:21:12 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E261E3A6A4A; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 01:21:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.088, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8mDvjJUAbwrG; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 01:21:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 841143A69FE; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 01:21:08 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,384,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="136507575" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2009 04:20:47 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.16]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2009 04:20:45 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 10:20:29 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-eai-downgrade-11.txt to Experimental RFC thread-index: AcmHImXDHd8hvrU4SUiGOhENRVIU7AAUIImQ From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-eai-downgrade-11.txt to Experimental RFC X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 09:21:13 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-eai-downgrade-11.txt Technical Summary This document specifies a downgrading procedure for messages that are extended according to the EAI UTF8SMTP extension, when these are being sent to a recipient MTA that does not support the UTF8SMTP extension. Working Group Summary The WG came to consensus on this document. Document Quality The document has been reviewed in the WG. From dromasca@avaya.com Thu Feb 5 02:40:32 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADA333A68A5; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 02:40:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.112 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.112 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.312, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w5NV+IKKpZaf; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 02:40:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AFFA3A6C7D; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 02:40:31 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,384,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="160405297" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.avaya.com with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2009 05:40:11 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.16]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2009 05:40:10 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 11:40:09 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-irtf-routing-history-09.txt to Historic thread-index: AcmG9urbPDljVbP2R4OEeVDA5RQaLgAhxZzA From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-irtf-routing-history-09.txt to Historic X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 10:40:32 -0000 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-routing-history-09.txt The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html. Thank you, The IESG Secretary Technical Summary This document analyses the state of the Internet domain-based routing system, concentrating on Inter-Domain Routing (IDR) and also considering the relationship between inter-domain and intra-domain routing. The analysis is carried out with respect to RFC 1126 and other IDR requirements and design efforts looking at the routing system as it appeared to be in 2001 with editorial additions reflecting developments up to 2006. It is the companion document to "A Set of Possible Requirements for a Future Routing Architecture" [I-D.irtf-routing-reqs], which is a discussion of requirements for the future routing architecture, addressing systems developments and future routing protocols. This document summarizes discussions held several years ago by members of the IRTF Routing Research Group (IRTF RRG) and other interested parties. The document is published with the support of the IRTF RRG as a record of the work completed at that time, but with the understanding that it does not necessarily represent either the latest technical understanding or the technical concensus of the research group at the date of publication. Working Group Summary This is an IRTF output, and is being considered by the IESG only=20 to consider whether there is any overlap or conflict with IETF work.=20 Document Quality This is an informational document which is not subject to implementation. It has been carefully reviewed in the IRTF.=20 Personnel Ross Callon has agreed to shepherd this through IESG review.=20 RFC Editor Note =20 This work does not conflict with IETF work, and we recommend that=20 the RFC editor publish this document.=20 In section 2, right after the third paragraph (which starts: "It is =20 generally accepted..."), please add the following note: Reviewer's Note: Even in 2001, there was a wide difference of opinion across the community regarding the shortcomings of interdomain routing. In the years between writing and publication, further analysis, changes in operational practice, alterations to the demands made on inter-domain routing, modifications made to BGP and a recognition of the difficulty of finding a replacement may have altered the views of some members of the community. IRTF Note (Insert IRTF Note here or remove section) IESG Note (Insert IESG Note here or remove section) IANA Note (Insert IANA Note here or remove section) From dromasca@avaya.com Thu Feb 5 02:41:07 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB2B13A6C82; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 02:41:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.997 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.424, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_OBFU_Q1=0.227, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1tpJKiHbvvsd; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 02:41:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE6E63A6C80; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 02:41:06 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,384,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="160405342" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.avaya.com with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2009 05:40:47 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.16]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2009 05:40:46 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 11:40:43 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-irtf-routing-reqs-10.txt to Historic thread-index: AcmG9ibwZWgYhjvPQc2jIrK9Vch8gAAiAF1Q From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-irtf-routing-reqs-10.txt to Historic X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 10:41:08 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-routing-reqs-10.txt The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html. Thank you, The IESG Secretary Technical Summary The requirements for routing architectures described in this document were produced by two sub-groups under the IRTF Routing Research Group in 2001, with some editorial updates up to 2006. The two sub-groups worked independently, and the resulting requirements represent two separate views of the problem and of what is required to fix the problem. This document may usefully serve as part of the recommended reading for anyone who works on routing architecture designs for the Internet in the future. The document is published with the support of the IRTF RRG as a record of the work completed at that time, but with the understanding that it does not necessarily represent either the latest technical understanding or the technical consensus of the research group at the date of publication. Working Group Summary This is an IRTF output, and is being considered by the IESG only=20 to consider whether there is any overlap or conflict with IETF work.=20 Document Quality This is an informational document which is not subject to implementation. It has been carefully reviewed in the IRTF.=20 Personnel Ross Callon has agreed to shepherd this through IESG review.=20 RFC Editor Note This work does not conflict with IETF work, and we recommend that=20 the RFC editor publish this document.=20 Right after the first paragraph of section 3.1 (which starts: "It is=20 generally accepted..."), please add the following note: Reviewer's Note: Even in 2001, there was a wide difference of opinion across the community regarding the shortcomings of interdomain routing. In the years between writing and publication, further analysis, changes in operational practice, alterations to the demands made on inter-domain routing, modifications made to BGP and a recognition of the difficulty of finding a replacement may have altered the views of some members of the community. IRTF Note (Insert IRTF Note here or remove section) IESG Note (Insert IESG Note here or remove section) IANA Note (Insert IANA Note here or remove section) From dromasca@avaya.com Thu Feb 5 04:33:41 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C4803A6A24; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 04:33:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.509 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.509 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.090, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iYscaIaxE9CV; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 04:33:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com (nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60F1D3A6927; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 04:33:40 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,385,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="151236007" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2009 07:33:19 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.16]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2009 07:33:18 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 13:33:02 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: BOF proposals for IETF-74 thread-index: AcmHjeLd2xfbkcdgR36IHhQC2eA5tg== From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , , , "MIB Doctors (E-mail)" Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] BOF proposals for IETF-74 X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:33:41 -0000 I apologize for the late warning. The IAB and IESG will be meeting in a few hours to review the BOF requests for IETF-74. The information about the BOFs and links to the relevant documents can be found at http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki. If there are any comments or concerns please send them to Ron and me until today 11:30AM ET.=20 Thanks and Regards, Dan From dromasca@avaya.com Thu Feb 5 07:33:45 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9725E3A6A8A; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 07:33:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.089, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HV93--Oex4xB; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 07:33:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com (nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F22E3A6AFE; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 07:33:44 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,385,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="151259513" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2009 10:33:24 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.16]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2009 10:33:23 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 16:33:14 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Last Call: draft-jones-dime-3gpp-eps-command-codes (Diameter Command Code Registration for Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)) to Informational RFC thread-index: AcmHnHteYLJo5yYDRNeWVaYYhBENgQACl71w From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Last Call: draft-jones-dime-3gpp-eps-command-codes (Diameter Command Code Registration for Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)) to Informational RFC X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 15:33:45 -0000 FYI - please send your comments to ietf@ietf.org.=20 Regards, Dan -----Original Message----- From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of The IESG Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 4:17 PM To: IETF-Announce Subject: Last Call: draft-jones-dime-3gpp-eps-command-codes (Diameter Command Code Registration for Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)) to Informational RFC The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the following document: - 'Diameter Command Code Registration for Third Generation Partnership=20 Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS) ' as an Informational RFC The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2009-03-05. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. The file can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jones-dime-3gpp-eps-command-co des-01.txt IESG discussion can be tracked via https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=3Dview_id&dTag= =3D 18081&rfc_flag=3D0 _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce From dromasca@avaya.com Fri Feb 6 01:52:20 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A60C3A6BAC; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 01:52:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.088, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2VjQoR20rGXL; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 01:52:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com (nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 912823A6BAB; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 01:52:12 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,390,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="151353517" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com with ESMTP; 06 Feb 2009 04:51:57 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 06 Feb 2009 04:51:56 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 10:51:33 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for February 12, 2009 Telechat Thread-Index: AcmH7cPB4IsyK/alQkWtMTXAzASRIAAUmhVg From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , , , "MIB Doctors (E-mail)" Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for February 12, 2009 Telechat X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 09:52:20 -0000 Please find below the preliminary agenda of the 2/12 IESG telechat. Please review the relevant documents and send me your comments and concerns until 2/11 COB the latest.=20 Thanks and Regards, Dan 2.1 WG Submissions 2.1.1 New Item o draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-05.txt Dissemination of flow specification rules (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 2 =20 Token: David Ward o draft-ietf-ippm-duplicate-07.txt A One-Way Packet Duplication Metric (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 2=20 Token: Lars Eggert 2.1.2 Returning Item o draft-ietf-forces-protocol-21.txt ForCES Protocol Specification (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 2=20 Token: Ross Callon o draft-ietf-pim-rpf-vector-08.txt The RPF Vector TLV (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 2=20 Token: David Ward 2.2 Individual Submissions 2.2.1 New Item o draft-arkko-arp-iana-rules-05.txt IANA Allocation Guidelines for the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 1=20 Token: Russ Housley 2.2.2 Returning Item NONE 2.2.3 For Action o draft-atlas-icmp-unnumbered-06.txt Extending ICMP for Interface and Next-hop Identification (Proposed=20 Standard) - 1 of 1=20 Note: Needs to go back to the WG due to the IPR declaration=20 Token: Jari Arkko 3. Document Actions 3.1 WG Submissions Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?" 3.1.1 New Item o draft-ietf-eai-downgrade-11.txt Downgrading mechanism for Email Address Internationalization (Experimental)=20 - 1 of 3=20 Note: Harald Alvestrand is document shepherd=20 Token: Chris Newman o draft-ietf-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-06.txt Requirements for the Conversion Between Permanent Connections and Switched=20 Connections in a Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Network=20 (Informational) - 2 of 3=20 Token: Ross Callon o draft-ietf-ccamp-gr-description-04.txt Description of the RSVP-TE Graceful Restart Procedures (Informational) - 3=20 of 3=20 Token: Ross Callon 3.1.2 Returning Item o draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-mcast-reqts-07.txt Requirements for Multicast Support in Virtual Private LAN Services=20 (Informational) - 1 of 1=20 Note: Bringing back to telechat to get attention on remaining discusses.=20 Token: Mark Townsley 3.2 Individual Submissions Via AD Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?" 3.2.1 New Item NONE 3.2.2 Returning Item NONE 3.3 Independent Submissions Via RFC Editor The IESG will use RFC 3932 responses: 1) The IESG has not found any conflict between this document and IETF work; 2) The IESG thinks that this work is related to IETF work done in WG , but this does not prevent publishing; 3) The IESG thinks that publication is harmful to work in WG and recommends not publishing at this time; 4) The IESG thinks that this document violates the IETF procedures for and should therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval; 5) The IESG thinks that this document extends an IETF protocol in a way that requires IETF review and should therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval. The document shepherd must propose one of these responses in the Data Tracker note and supply complete text in the IESG Note portion of the write-up. The Area Director ballot positions indicate consensus with the response proposed by the document shepherd. Other matters may be recorded in comments, and the comments will be passed on to the RFC Editor as community review of the document. 3.3.1 New Item o draft-irtf-routing-history-09.txt Analysis of Inter-Domain Routing Requirements and History (Historic) - 1 of=20 2=20 Token: Ross Callon o draft-irtf-routing-reqs-10.txt A Set of Possible Requirements for a Future Routing Architecture (Historic)=20 - 2 of 2=20 Token: Ross Callon From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 8 03:46:28 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E99413A6906; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 03:46:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.088, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SFETJRSKyHoK; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 03:46:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF2EC3A6A3F; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 03:46:26 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,399,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="136771126" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2009 06:46:28 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2009 06:46:27 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 12:46:15 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements-06.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmI7TGq1os/zOYvRF2W275E+RHCAAA9Zz9Q From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements-06.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 11:46:29 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-softwire-security-require ments-06.txt Technical Summary This document describes the security guidelines for the softwire "Hubs and Spokes" and "Mesh" solutions. Together with the discussion of the softwire deployment scenarios, the vulnerability to the security attacks is analyzed to provide the security protection mechanism such as authentication, integrity and confidentiality to the softwire control and data packets. Working Group Summary The SOFTWIRE WG supports the development and advancement of this document. Protocol Quality This document was thoroughly reviewed by WG chairs and WG members, including those with expertise in security, IPv4 to IPv6 transitions and interworking. RFC Editor Note (Insert RFC Editor Note here or remove section) IRTF Note (Insert IRTF Note here or remove section) IESG Note (Insert IESG Note here or remove section) IANA Note (Insert IANA Note here or remove section) From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 8 03:47:14 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76C0A3A6906; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 03:47:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.512 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.512 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.087, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i2-mAQucJvg6; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 03:47:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16D983A657C; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 03:47:12 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,399,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="136771141" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2009 06:47:15 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2009 06:47:14 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 12:46:53 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-proto-11.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmI7NaFx/Hz6PAATIGvdwqPqZoNggA9hBGA From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-proto-11.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 11:47:14 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-proto-11.txt Technical Summary: The Network Time Protocol (NTP) is widely used to synchronize computer clocks in the Internet. This document describes NTP Version 4 (NTPv4), which is backwards compatible with NTP Version 3 (NTPv3) described in RFC 1305, as well as previous versions of the protocol. NTPv4 includes a modified protocol header to accommodate the Internet Protocol Version 6 address family. NTPv4 includes fundamental improvements in the mitigation and discipline algorithms which extend the potential accuracy to the tens of microseconds with modern workstations and fast LANs. It includes a dynamic server discovery scheme, so that in many cases specific server configuration is not required. It corrects certain errors in the NTPv3 design and implementation and includes an optional extension mechanism. Working Group Summary: The NTP working group has done extensive reviews of this document, and it reflects the consensus of the working group. Document Quality: This document has been reviewed by several members of the ntpwg@lists.ntp.org mailing list and by the NTP WG chairs. RFC Editor Note (Insert RFC Editor Note here or remove section) IRTF Note (Insert IRTF Note here or remove section) IESG Note (Insert IESG Note here or remove section) IANA Note (Insert IANA Note here or remove section) From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 8 03:47:36 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52673A6906; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 03:47:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.512 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.512 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.087, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FS4XE7SzPMjs; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 03:47:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 674103A657C; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 03:47:34 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,399,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="160709433" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.avaya.com with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2009 06:47:37 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2009 06:47:37 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 12:47:16 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-mib-05.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmI7LvGDj0neGMRRbO63CbatHzToAA9jiZw From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-mib-05.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 11:47:36 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-mib-05.txt Technical Summary: The Network Time Protocol (NTP) is used in networks of all types and sizes for time synchronization of servers, workstations and other networked equipment. As time synchronization is more and more a mission critical service, standardized means for monitoring and management of this subsystem of a networked host are required to allow operators of such a service to setup a monitoring system that is platform- and vendor-independant. This Internet draft provides a standardized collection of data objects for monitoring the NTP entity of such a network participant, and it is part of the NTP Version 4 standardization effort. Working Group Summary: The NTP working group has done extensive reviews of this document, and it reflects the consensus of the working group. Document Quality: This document has been reviewed by several members of the ntpwg@lists.ntp.org mailing list and by the NTP WG chairs. RFC Editor Note (Insert RFC Editor Note here or remove section) IRTF Note (Insert IRTF Note here or remove section) IESG Note (Insert IESG Note here or remove section) IANA Note (Insert IANA Note here or remove section) From Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net Sun Feb 8 05:17:09 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 670C73A68A6 for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 05:17:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.349 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.250, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0EGy5-gcHge6 for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 05:17:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 2B0723A6906 for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 05:17:07 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 08 Feb 2009 13:17:10 -0000 Received: from a91-154-108-144.elisa-laajakaista.fi (EHLO 4FIL42860) [91.154.108.144] by mail.gmx.net (mp053) with SMTP; 08 Feb 2009 14:17:10 +0100 X-Authenticated: #29516787 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18WR78yrWMWqwEtftmLn51rsjAK3Lts+CODC8ISM2 1yga929DXh2Sc+ From: "Hannes Tschofenig" To: "'Joseph Salowey'" Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 15:17:58 +0200 Message-ID: <004a01c989ef$a972ec80$0201a8c0@nsnintra.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 1 (Highest) X-MSMail-Priority: High X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Thread-Index: AcmI7TGq1os/zOYvRF2W275E+RHCAAA9Zz9QAAMh7LA= Importance: High X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.54 Cc: aaa-doctors@ietf.org Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] REVIEW of draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements-06.txt X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 13:17:09 -0000 Joe, could you please review this document for the AAA doctors team? I browsed through it and the term "AAA" was all over the place. Thanks. Ciao Hannes >-----Original Message----- >From: aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org >[mailto:aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan) >Sent: 08 February, 2009 13:46 >To: aaa-doctors@ietf.org; ops-dir@ietf.org >Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: >Evaluation:draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements-06.txt to >ProposedStandard > > > > >A URL of this Internet-Draft is: >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-softwire-securit >y-require >ments-06.txt > >Technical Summary > >This document describes the security guidelines for the >softwire "Hubs and Spokes" and "Mesh" solutions. Together with >the discussion of the softwire deployment scenarios, the >vulnerability to the security attacks is analyzed to provide >the security protection mechanism such as authentication, >integrity and confidentiality to the softwire control and data packets. > >Working Group Summary > >The SOFTWIRE WG supports the development and advancement of >this document. > >Protocol Quality > >This document was thoroughly reviewed by WG chairs and WG >members, including those with expertise in security, IPv4 to >IPv6 transitions and interworking. > >RFC Editor Note > > (Insert RFC Editor Note here or remove section) > >IRTF Note > > (Insert IRTF Note here or remove section) > >IESG Note > > (Insert IESG Note here or remove section) > >IANA Note > > (Insert IANA Note here or remove section) > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >AAA-DOCTORS mailing list >AAA-DOCTORS@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aaa-doctors > From jsalowey@cisco.com Sun Feb 8 21:04:40 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C60F43A6877 for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:04:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.597 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.002, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EPbv9OEb2-gP for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:04:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 228B728C114 for ; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:04:35 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,403,1231113600"; d="scan'208";a="129826155" Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Feb 2009 05:04:40 +0000 Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com (sj-core-4.cisco.com [171.68.223.138]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n1954eXF008388; Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:04:40 -0800 Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1954eeM005986; Mon, 9 Feb 2009 05:04:40 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-225.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.38]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:04:39 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:04:38 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <004a01c989ef$a972ec80$0201a8c0@nsnintra.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: REVIEW of draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements-06.txt Thread-Index: AcmI7TGq1os/zOYvRF2W275E+RHCAAA9Zz9QAAMh7LAAIQr/IA== References: <004a01c989ef$a972ec80$0201a8c0@nsnintra.net> From: "Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" To: "Hannes Tschofenig" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Feb 2009 05:04:39.0962 (UTC) FILETIME=[E97857A0:01C98A73] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2409; t=1234155880; x=1235019880; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jsalowey@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Joseph=20Salowey=20(jsalowey)=22=20 |Subject:=20RE=3A=20REVIEW=20of=20=20draft-ietf-softwire-se curity-requirements-06.txt |Sender:=20; bh=vEBwJSTivX/o0QnzweSTwAf/KuQjNW2iKW5z1CaSb4Q=; b=djKzuy/dV1xXV/pYgx3sC/n4N243DtnNKd5AOodv87Y2iJ4EjY9vMrJBMW A6TYMqfk3un2/QEGmEBGLSEWVNKBZRO1/iN7tHmAU/4+nUdY7VtqXq/FYRhr gVjr49HhAI; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=jsalowey@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; ); Cc: aaa-doctors@ietf.org Subject: Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] REVIEW of draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements-06.txt X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 05:04:40 -0000 OK, will do, it looks like this document is just entering IETF Last Call, is that correct? =20 Thanks, Joe > -----Original Message----- > From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net]=20 > Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 5:18 AM > To: Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) > Cc: aaa-doctors@ietf.org > Subject: REVIEW of draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements-06.txt > Importance: High >=20 > Joe, could you please review this document for the AAA doctors team?=20 >=20 > I browsed through it and the term "AAA" was all over the place.=20 >=20 > Thanks.=20 >=20 > Ciao > Hannes >=20 > >-----Original Message----- > >From: aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org > >[mailto:aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of=20 > Romascanu, Dan (Dan) > >Sent: 08 February, 2009 13:46 > >To: aaa-doctors@ietf.org; ops-dir@ietf.org > >Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW:=20 > >Evaluation:draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements-06.txt to=20 > >ProposedStandard > > > >=20 > > > > > >A URL of this Internet-Draft is: > >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-softwire-security-requir ements-06.txt > > > >Technical Summary > > > >This document describes the security guidelines for the=20 > softwire "Hubs=20 > >and Spokes" and "Mesh" solutions. Together with the=20 > discussion of the=20 > >softwire deployment scenarios, the vulnerability to the security=20 > >attacks is analyzed to provide the security protection=20 > mechanism such=20 > >as authentication, integrity and confidentiality to the softwire=20 > >control and data packets. > > > >Working Group Summary > > > >The SOFTWIRE WG supports the development and advancement of this=20 > >document. > > > >Protocol Quality > > > >This document was thoroughly reviewed by WG chairs and WG members,=20 > >including those with expertise in security, IPv4 to > >IPv6 transitions and interworking. > > > >RFC Editor Note > > > > (Insert RFC Editor Note here or remove section) > > > >IRTF Note > > > > (Insert IRTF Note here or remove section) > > > >IESG Note > > > > (Insert IESG Note here or remove section) > > > >IANA Note > > > > (Insert IANA Note here or remove section) > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >AAA-DOCTORS mailing list > >AAA-DOCTORS@ietf.org > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aaa-doctors > > >=20 >=20 From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 15 09:12:32 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65E273A691E; Sun, 15 Feb 2009 09:12:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.212 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.212 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.387, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2Fd4mJVE23xM; Sun, 15 Feb 2009 09:12:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com (nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 153413A6909; Sun, 15 Feb 2009 09:12:27 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,212,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="152352700" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 15 Feb 2009 12:12:36 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 15 Feb 2009 12:12:35 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 18:12:15 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Internal WG Review: Recharter of Inter-Domain Routing (idr) Thread-Index: AcmNYLjzp5Msdz9dQOeQA11sjtnpFwCL6FEA From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Internal WG Review: Recharter of Inter-Domain Routing (idr) X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 17:12:32 -0000 Please let me know if there are any issues with the text of the proposed new charter until 2/18 COB the latest.=20 Thanks and Regards, Dan -----Original Message----- From: iesg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of IESG Secretary Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 12:25 AM To: iesg@ietf.org; iab@iab.org; shares@ghs.com; yakov@juniper.net Subject: Internal WG Review: Recharter of Inter-Domain Routing (idr)=20 A new charter for the Inter-Domain Routing working group (idr) in the Routing Area of the IETF is being considered. The draft charter is provided below for your review and comment. Review time is one week.

The IETF Secretariat Inter-Domain Routing (idr) -------------------------------------------------- 
Last Modified: 2009-02-12 Current Status: Active Working Group Chairs: Susan Hares [shares@ghs.com] Yakov Rekhter [yakov@juniper.net] Routing Area Director(s): Ross Callon [rcallon@juniper.net] David Ward [dward@cisco.com] Routing Area Advisor: David Ward [dward@cisco.com] Technical Advisor(s): Randall Atkinson [rja@extremenetworks.com] Sharon Chisholm [schishol@nortel.com] Mailing Lists: General Discussion: idr@ietf.org To Subscribe: idr-request@ietf.org In Body: subscribe idr-post Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/idr/index.html Description of Working Group: The Inter-Domain Routing Working Group is chartered to standardize and promote the Border Gateway Protocol Version 4 (BGP-4) [RFC 1771] capable of supporting policy based routing for TCP/IP internets. The objective is to promote the use of BGP-4 to support IP version 4 and IP version 6. The working group will continue to work on improving the scalability of BGP. The current tasks of the WG are limited to: - Revise and clarify the base BGP4 document (RFC 1771). Note that RFC 1771 no longer documents existing practice and one goal of the update is document existing practice. Determine whether the document can be advanced as full Standard or needs to recycle at Proposed or Draft Standard. - Submit updated base BGP4 MIB to accompany the revised base BGP4 document. Once these tasks are finished (means WG consensus, WG Last Call, AD Review, IETF Last Call, and IESG approval for publication), work will progress on the following: - Review and Evaluate Existing RFCs on AS Confederations and Route Reflection. If changes are needed, create and advance revisions. - Review and evaluate Multiprotocol BGP (RFC 2858) for advancement as Draft Standard. - Progress BGP Extended Communities along standards track. - Extend BGP to support a 4-byte AS number, develop plan for transitioning to usage of 4-byte AS numbers. Advance support for a 4-byte AS numbers along standards track. - Produce BGP MIB v2 that includes support for AS Confederations, Route Reflection, Communities, Multi-Protocol BGP, BGP Extended Communities, support for 4-byte AS numbers. - Progress along the IETF standards track a BGP-based mechanism that allows a BGP speaker to send to its BGP peer a set of route filters that the peer would use to constrain/filter its outbound routing updates to the speaker. Currently defined in draft-ietf-idr-route-filter-03.txt. - Progress along standards track an Outbound Router Filter (ORF) type for BGP, that can be used to perform aspath based route filtering. The ORF-type will support aspath based route filtering as well as regular expression based matching for address groups. Currently defined in draft-ietf-idr-aspath-orf-00.txt. - Progress a BGP Graceful Restart mechanism along standards track. - Progress Subcodes for BGP Cease Notification Message along standards track. - Progress AS-wide Unique BGP Identifier for BGP-4 along standards track. - Progress Dynamic Capability for BGP-4 along standards track. - Progress Flow Specification rules along standards track. Tasks for this working group are limited to those listed above; new items to be added to the charter must be approved by the IESG. Goals and Milestones: Done Submit to BGP Capability Advertisement to the IESG Done Submit BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis to IESG as an Informational Done Submit BGP4 MIB to IESG as a Proposed Standard Done Submit BGP4 document to IESG as a Draft Standard Done Submit Extended Communities draft to IESG as a Proposed Standard Done Submit BGP Graceful Restart to IESG as a Proposed Standard Done Submit revised text on Multi-Protocol BGP (rfc2858bis) to IESG as a Draft Standard Done Submit Subcodes for BGP Cease Notification Message to IESG as a Proposed Standard Done Submit 4-byte AS ID to IESG as a Proposed Standard Done Submit Outbound Route Filter, Prefix and ASpath ORF draft to IESG as a Proposed Standard Mar 2008 Submit AS-wide Unique BGP Identifier for BGP-4 to IESG as a Proposed Standard Mar 2008 Prefix and ASpath ORF draft to IESG as a Proposed Standard Mar 2008 Prefix and ASpath ORF draft to IESG as a Proposed Standard Mar 2008 Submit Dynamic Capability for BGP-4 to IESG as a Proposed Standard=20 
 From dromasca@avaya.com Mon Feb 16 03:27:41 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E3523A6A8F; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 03:27:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.454 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.454 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.145, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j1LBg+Cf5QD4; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 03:27:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F08CF3A68D2; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 03:27:39 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,216,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="137573855" Received: from unknown (HELO nj300815-nj-erheast.avaya.com) ([198.152.6.5]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 16 Feb 2009 06:27:48 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by nj300815-nj-erheast-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 16 Feb 2009 06:27:47 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:27:44 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-heartbeat-03.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmPoFEGVAATWxMdR8mWxd+iW/ic5wAiTguA From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-heartbeat-03.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 11:27:41 -0000 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-heartbeat-0 3.txt Technical Summary Proxy Mobile IPv6 has consists of two network elements - Mobile Access Gateway (MAG), and Local Mobility Anchor (LMA). This heartbeat mechanism provides a failure detection mechanism between those two network elements. Working Group Summary There is a consensus in Netlmm WG that this specification is ready to be published as a proposed standard. Document Quality The document has gone through various reviews and a successful WGLC. Personnel Responsible AD is Jari Arkko and the document shepherd is Jonne Soininen. RFC Editor Note (Insert RFC Editor Note here or remove section) IRTF Note (Insert IRTF Note here or remove section) IESG Note (Insert IESG Note here or remove section) IANA Note (Insert IANA Note here or remove section) From dromasca@avaya.com Mon Feb 16 07:17:28 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2273D3A6C40; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 07:17:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.477 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.477 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.122, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gL4SJADXBiAY; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 07:17:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com (nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0378B3A6BCF; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 07:17:26 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,216,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="152425091" Received: from unknown (HELO nj300815-nj-erheast.avaya.com) ([198.152.6.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 16 Feb 2009 10:17:36 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by nj300815-nj-erheast-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 16 Feb 2009 10:17:36 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:17:14 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-rserpool-mib-11.txt to Experimental RFC Thread-Index: AcmQSEv6LBUvyiAcS6CRB+Gyci2aEwAALubg From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "MIB Doctors (E-mail)" , , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-rserpool-mib-11.txt to Experimental RFC X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 15:17:28 -0000 =20 Technical Summary: This document defines a SMIv2 compliant Management Information Base (MIB) providing access to managed objects in an implementation of the Reliable Server Pool architecture and protocols. It is intended as an Experimental Track RFC. Working Group Summary This document has been reviewed by Rserpool protocol experts within the WG and no controversy or difficulty was encountered with obtaining consensus on this document. Document Quality There are no implementations of the MIB at this time, but a number of researchers have implemented the protocols and reviewed the MIB specification based on their work.=20 MIB Directorate review was performed by Bert Wijnen.=20 Personnel Lyndon Ong, co-chair of the Rserpool WG, is shepherd for this document. Magnus Westerlund provided review as the responsible Area Director. From jsalowey@cisco.com Mon Feb 16 20:50:44 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A978A3A680D; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 20:50:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u4yh3b-swNP9; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 20:50:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from sj-iport-5.cisco.com (sj-iport-5.cisco.com [171.68.10.87]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70F5B3A6765; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 20:50:43 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,220,1233532800"; d="scan'208";a="63590689" Received: from sj-dkim-1.cisco.com ([171.71.179.21]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Feb 2009 04:50:54 +0000 Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (sj-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.177.237]) by sj-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n1H4osP3031658; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 20:50:54 -0800 Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1H4osGF011011; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 04:50:54 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-225.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.38]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 16 Feb 2009 20:50:53 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 20:50:52 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [AAA-DOCTORS] REVIEW of draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements Thread-Index: AcmI7TGq1os/zOYvRF2W275E+RHCAAA9Zz9QAAMh7LAAIQr/IAFXjfEw References: <004a01c989ef$a972ec80$0201a8c0@nsnintra.net> From: "Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" To: "Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Feb 2009 04:50:53.0911 (UTC) FILETIME=[5068F670:01C990BB] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=3970; t=1234846254; x=1235710254; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim1004; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jsalowey@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Joseph=20Salowey=20(jsalowey)=22=20 |Subject:=20[AAA-DOCTORS]=20REVIEW=20of=20draft-ietf-softwi re-security-requirements |Sender:=20; bh=CeKEOZcbBZwrYz+IrXhtRenqJScoCwlFBntpht8Zy3Y=; b=jBe/F9nsnO3gvZSTHXWJTAKV/yeOPAb4POrrvLmNLq5AimVU6cE3rfd7qy z61EGZkzkFfAbVWJctxmqL7lBgM3Wzj7sLYHtbdCyI2ON5kmHhrrZ9na/4+W jrMq7FOZGFRBuMuGzzqo0eZxGC4MCTw+f744XA1NGbQ6h9Ml44p7Y=; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=jsalowey@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; ); Cc: aaa-doctors@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] REVIEW of draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 04:50:44 -0000 I've reviewed draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements-06.txt as part of the AAA doctors review process. I found some issues that may need to be addressed. I focused mainly on the AAA issues within the document, there may be other issues with the document not covered by this review.=20 General comments:=20 The document contains useful information, but I found it hard to follow. This is partially because it has been a long time since I looked at L2TP and softwires and partially because of the organization of the document. The document does discuss AAA authentication with respect to several deployment scenarios. I found the document unclear as to how the AAA integration was expected. There are at least 4 different processes mentioned that can integrate with AAA: PPP, L2TP, IKEv2 and L2/PANA access authentication. In most cases the document is not clear on what is integrating with AAA. Its not clear if AAA authentication needs to be addressed at all these processes or what the relationship between authentication at different process is. Is a binding necessary between the AAA authentication and an encrypted tunnel? =20 Although trust relationships are identified the document does not define the details what risks are assumed under the various models. This information helps to evaluate and manage the risk associated with the trust relationship. Below are some specific comments on the document: 1. section 3.2 This section describes a proxied trust model, but it does not provide the details needed to evaluate and manage the risk associated with the trust relationship. For example it is state the visited AAA and home AAA have a trust relationship: what does one rely upon the other to do? What are the risks if the trust relationship is violated? Are there suggested ways to mitigate this risk? =20 In section 3.2, the document makes the following statement: "The SI and the visited AAA server do not usually have a trust relationship; however, if the SI can confirm that the home AAA server is involved with the authentication of the SI and the visited AAA server does not alter security information from the home AAA server, the visited AAA server can be trusted by the SI." =20 I'm not quite clear on what this sentence is stating. There is no direct connection made between this statement and mechanisms listed in the document. It does not appear that the SI can confirm the home AAA server is involved using the mechanisms in the document or confirm that the visited AAA server does not alter the security information (what is security information). This section also states: " The communication between the SI, the home and visited AAA servers must be protected. " In general it doesn't appear that the SI and the home and visited AAA servers communicate directly (I don't think the SI is a AAA client). This needs to be clarified as to what process are involved in the communication and what exactly needs to be protected.=20 2. Section 3.4.1 Different authentication methods have different security properties. For example, there are tremendous differences in security between PAP and CHAP or between EAP-TLS and CHAP. It seems there should be some discussion of this. I'm also a little bit surprised that mutual authentication is only a SHOULD for the protocol (deployments may choose not to enable it, but it seems the protocol should support it). =20 3. Section 3.5 Its not clear to me how the tunnel is authenticated. I think this section needs to be clearer about the different authentication choices. It covers several choices; pre-shared key, certificate, EAP, but doesn't really describe where or how they should be used, or how they affect (or don't affect) authentication in other processes. Some of the drafts (draft-eronen-ipsec-ikev2-eap-auth-05) mentioned in the section have expired long ago. =20 Joe From dromasca@avaya.com Tue Feb 17 02:24:00 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F33528C14F; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 02:24:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.494 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.494 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.105, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0H8plSlVRhjm; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 02:23:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 288F428C15E; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 02:23:58 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,222,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="161753713" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 17 Feb 2009 05:24:09 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 17 Feb 2009 05:24:08 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 11:23:47 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <02ec01c99065$c993e7e0$0600a8c0@china.huawei.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-rserpool-mib-11.txt toExperimental RFC Thread-Index: AcmQSEv6LBUvyiAcS6CRB+Gyci2aEwAALubgAATzZUAAIxk+0A== References: <02ec01c99065$c993e7e0$0600a8c0@china.huawei.com> From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "David B Harrington" , "MIB Doctors (E-mail)" , , Subject: Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-rserpool-mib-11.txt toExperimental RFC X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 10:24:00 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: David B Harrington [mailto:dbharrington@comcast.net]=20 > Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 8:39 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); 'MIB Doctors (E-mail)';=20 > ops-dir@ietf.org; aaa-doctors@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation:=20 > draft-ietf-rserpool-mib-11.txt toExperimental RFC >=20 > Hi, >=20 > why experimental track? The abstract didn't mention why, so I=20 > thought I would look in the document to see why it was=20 > experimental track. > (Boy! you'd think after this long as a MIB Doctor, I would=20 > know better than to let my curiosity drive me to open any of=20 > these documents ;-) >=20 > There is no discussion in the document of why this is an=20 > experimental track MIB module, and what that means to=20 > implementers and deployers. I would think this should be=20 > documented in an Opartional Consideration section, or=20 > something siliar, ir not the abstract and Introduction. >=20 > will this MIB module be assigned an OID in the experimental subtree? > That is known to cause problmes if it is moved from the=20 > expermiental track later. Is this really necessary? >=20 Yes, this is what this document requires. All rserpool protocol documents are Experimental. Do you believe that in such case it makes sense to define the MIB as anything but Experimental?=20 Dan =20 From dromasca@avaya.com Thu Feb 19 23:05:38 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAD8E3A687F; Thu, 19 Feb 2009 23:05:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.455 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.455 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.143, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SrOx6oEdljs6; Thu, 19 Feb 2009 23:05:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 369173A6802; Thu, 19 Feb 2009 23:05:37 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,239,1233550800"; d="scan'208,217";a="162191735" Received: from unknown (HELO nj300815-nj-erheast.avaya.com) ([198.152.6.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 20 Feb 2009 02:05:50 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by nj300815-nj-erheast-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 20 Feb 2009 02:05:49 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C99329.A0F9D755" Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 08:04:03 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for February 26, 2009 Telechat Thread-Index: AcmS9B7gt+U8FohGRR6ye+lyv9nagAANUsfC References: <20090220004213.A3F773A68B4@core3.amsl.com> From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , , , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for February 26, 2009 Telechat X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 07:05:38 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C99329.A0F9D755 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Please find below the preliminary agenda of the 2/26 telechat. Please = send me your comments and concerns until 2/25 COB.=20 Thanks and Regards, Dan 2. Protocol Actions Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable basis on which to build the salient part of the Internet infrastructure? If not, what changes would make it so?" 2.1 WG Submissions 2.1.1 New Item o draft-ietf-mediactrl-vxml-04.txt SIP Interface to VoiceXML Media Services (Proposed Standard) - 1 of = 2 Token: Jon Peterson o draft-ietf-dime-qos-parameters-09.txt Quality of Service Parameters for Usage with Diameter (Proposed Standard) -=20 2 of 2=20 Token: Dan Romascanu 2.1.2 Returning Item NONE 2.2 Individual Submissions 2.2.1 New Item NONE 2.2.2 Returning Item NONE 3. Document Actions 3.1 WG Submissions Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?" 3.1.1 New Item o draft-ietf-rserpool-mib-11.txt Reliable Server Pooling MIB Module Definition (Experimental) - 1 of = 3 Token: Magnus Westerlund o draft-ietf-mediactrl-architecture-04.txt An Architectural Framework for Media Server Control (Informational) = - 2 of=20 3=20 Token: Jon Peterson o draft-ietf-pcn-architecture-09.txt Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) Architecture (Informational) - 3 = of 3=20 Note: Scott Bradner (sob@harvard.edu) is the Document Shepherd.=20 Token: Lars Eggert ------_=_NextPart_001_01C99329.A0F9D755 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable FW: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for February 26, 2009 Telechat =

Please find below the preliminary agenda of the 2/26 = telechat. Please send me your comments and concerns until 2/25 COB.

Thanks and Regards,

Dan


2. Protocol Actions
        Reviews should focus on these = questions: "Is this document a
        reasonable basis on which to = build the salient part of the Internet
        infrastructure? If not, what = changes would make it so?"


2.1 WG Submissions
2.1.1 New Item
  o draft-ietf-mediactrl-vxml-04.txt
    SIP Interface to VoiceXML Media Services (Proposed = Standard) - 1 of 2

    Token: Jon Peterson
  o draft-ietf-dime-qos-parameters-09.txt
    Quality of Service Parameters for Usage with Diameter = (Proposed
Standard) -
    2 of 2
    Token: Dan Romascanu

2.1.2 Returning Item
NONE

2.2 Individual Submissions
2.2.1 New Item
NONE
2.2.2 Returning Item
NONE

3. Document Actions

3.1 WG Submissions
        Reviews should focus on these = questions: "Is this document a reasonable
        contribution to the area of = Internet engineering which it covers? If
        not, what changes would make = it so?"

3.1.1 New Item
  o draft-ietf-rserpool-mib-11.txt
    Reliable Server Pooling MIB Module Definition = (Experimental) - 1 of 3

    Token: Magnus Westerlund
  o draft-ietf-mediactrl-architecture-04.txt
    An Architectural Framework for Media Server Control = (Informational) -
2 of
    3
    Token: Jon Peterson
  o draft-ietf-pcn-architecture-09.txt
    Pre-Congestion Notification (PCN) Architecture = (Informational) - 3 of
3
    Note: Scott Bradner (sob@harvard.edu) is the Document = Shepherd.
    Token: Lars Eggert

------_=_NextPart_001_01C99329.A0F9D755-- From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 22 06:43:27 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FDC73A6898; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:43:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.459 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.459 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.140, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7B3cmDt66Z6o; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:43:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com (nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 886FF3A67F6; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:43:23 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,250,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="153107928" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 09:43:30 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 09:43:30 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:43:28 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-avt-rtp-speex-05.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmTvAzL/fKdqSWdQw6keDK5jJWRJgBP8+vg From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-avt-rtp-speex-05.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 14:43:27 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-avt-rtp-speex-05.txt Technical Summary Speex is an open-source voice codec suitable for use in Voice over IP (VoIP) type applications. This document describes the payload format for Speex generated bit streams within an RTP packet. Also included here are the necessary details for the use of Speex with the Session Description Protocol (SDP). Working Group Summary The initial version of this draft was submitted in February 2002, and was eventually adopted as a working group draft in October 2005. After several false starts and changes in authorship, interest and progress picked up in 2007, leading to the completion of the draft. Adoption of the draft by the working group was delayed due to confusion on which signalling mechanisms should be defined. More recently, discussion has focussed on the detailed use of RTP headers, and media type parameter. The resulting format is a straight-forward RTP payload type specification. Document Quality There are several existing implementations (e.g. Ekiga, gstreamer). A Media type review was conducted starting on 31 March 2008; no issues were raised. Personnel Colin Perkins is the document shepherd. Cullen Jennings is the responsible area director. RFC Editor Note none From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 22 06:47:31 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF52E3A6A38; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:47:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.463 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.463 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.136, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KBBMMFDleFmD; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:47:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com (nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81F443A67F6; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:47:30 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,250,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="153108029" Received: from unknown (HELO nj300815-nj-erheast.avaya.com) ([198.152.6.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 09:47:46 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by nj300815-nj-erheast-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 09:47:46 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:47:25 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-avt-rtp-uemclip-04.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmTshdZi/H3XuPdQKWrb+8bHRuO3wBSk84w From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-avt-rtp-uemclip-04.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 14:47:31 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/0-06.txt Technical Summary This document describes the RTP payload format of a mU-law Embedded Coder for Low-delay IP communication (UEMCLIP), an enhanced speech codec of ITU-T G.711. The bitstream has a scalable structure with an embedded u-law bitstream, also known as PCMU, thus providing a handy transcoding operation between narrowband and wideband speech. Working Group Summary This is a reasonably standard RTP payload format. The document has been reviewed by the AVT working group and all open issues were addressed=20 Document Quality Media type review was conducted starting 26 February 2008, with no objections raised. There is at least one implementation.=20 Personnel Roni Even is the document shepherd.=20 The responsible area director is Cullen Jennings. RFC Editor Note Please add the followinf title page header lines: Obsoletes: 3978, 4748 Updates: 2026 OLD: Followings are additional guidelines for establishing a session using an offer-answer model. NEW: The following is a detailed list on the semantics of using the UEMCLIP payload format in an offer-answer exchange: In S1, second paragraph: OLD switched using SDP exchange. NEW=20 changed using an SDP exchange. In S2, first paragraph: OLD shift to the wideband. NEW shift to using wideband communication. From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 22 06:47:57 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E7CA3A68D6; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:47:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.466 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.466 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.133, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 46Nqz4JN+CuZ; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:47:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7BFB3A6A38; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:47:56 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,250,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="162369890" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 09:48:13 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 09:48:12 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:47:51 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-xcon-event-package-01.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmTsSJbStWoPBB4QIGbYe1lBw8EowBS14fg From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-xcon-event-package-01.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 14:47:57 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-xcon-event-package-01.txt Technical Summary This document specifies a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Event Package to provide state to partipants in a Centralized Conferencing (XCON)-defined conference, including the specification of a mechanism for partial notifications. Working Group Summary This document is a product of the XCON working group. Its contents have been uncontroversial in working group discussions. Document Quality Adam Roach has reviewed the document for quality. Personnel Adam Roach is the Document Shepherd for this document. Cullen Jennings is the responsible Area Director. RFC Editor Notes TODO - deal with genart and secdir review=20 Normative References: - Please replace draft-ietf-simple-xml-patch-ops with RFC 5261 - Please replace draft-ietf-xcon-common-data-model-08 with the proper RFC number when that document is published. Please create a "Non-Normative References" section: - Move draft-ietf-xcon-framework to it (changing it to RFC 5239 at the same time). - Move RFC 3688 to the non-normative references section. Section 6.3: - Please replace "consent-status" in the section heading with "xcon-conference-info-diff". From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 22 06:48:34 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8602D3A6A38; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:48:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.47 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.47 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.129, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YbvWyqIeFfVO; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:48:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com (nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D15C3A68D6; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:48:33 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,250,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="153108061" Received: from unknown (HELO nj300815-nj-erheast.avaya.com) ([198.152.6.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 09:48:50 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by nj300815-nj-erheast-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 09:48:49 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:48:27 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-non-compound-09.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmTsG3ozCGmSxV9RBSgUKkrzR0a7gBTClvg From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-non-compound-09.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 14:48:34 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-non-compound-08. txt Technical Summary This memo discusses benefits and issues that arise when allowing RTCP packets to be transmitted with reduced size. The size can be reduced if the rules on how to create compound packets outlined in RFC3550 are removed or changed. Based on that analysis this memo defines certain changes to the rules to allow feedback messages to be sent as reduced-size RTCP packets under certain conditions when using the RTP AVPF profile (RFC 4585). This document updates [RFC3550], [RFC3711] and [RFC4585]. Working Group Summary When the initial proposals for reduced-size RTCP reports were presented (end of 2006), they provoked considerable concern and discussion because they violated current RFC 3550 rules. Over the two years since, agreement has been reached on the acceptable modifications to RFC 3550 rules and the concerns that have to be documented along with them. The current document has strong WG consensus. Document Quality Colin Perkins and Randell Jesup provided oversight and insight throughout the evolution of this document. RFC Editor Note none From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 22 06:50:55 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EECE83A6A38; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:50:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.473 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.473 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.126, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Hk5JWXbhjiqw; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:50:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com (nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E80FB3A67F6; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:50:54 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,250,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="153108134" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 09:51:11 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 09:51:10 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:50:48 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-avt-rfc3047-bis-08.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmTr8Pgi1HzmQxGR0u4YmPB2xAhhgBTSa2g From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-avt-rfc3047-bis-08.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 14:50:56 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-avt-rfc3047-bis-08.txt Technical Summary International Telecommunication Union (ITU-T) Recommendation G.722.1 is a wide-band audio codec. This document describes the payload format for including G.722.1 generated bit streams within an RTP packet. The document also describes the syntax and semantics of the SDP parameters needed to support G.722.1 audio codec. Working Group Summary The G722.1 codec can change bit rate in mid-stream. Dealing with this successfully was an issue for discussion during WGLC. The resolution was to require each bit rate to have its own payload type. Document Quality Magnus Westerlund performed the initial review of the document. Aurelien Sollaud also provided careful reviews, particularly during WGLC. Personnel Tom Taylor is the Document Shepherd.=20 RFC Editor Note TODO - need to consider gen art comments and talk to magnus=20 IRTF Note none IESG Note non IANA Note none From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 22 06:53:24 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C4C53A6830; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:53:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.476 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.476 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.123, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 80f9Y86Ud0AR; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:53:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE7CD3A67F6; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:53:19 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,250,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="162370034" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 09:53:36 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 09:53:35 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:53:14 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Internal WG Review: Recharter of Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks (roll) Thread-Index: AcmTqq3gDziyaqMCTLqqorYpfGZyZABUl7Mg From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , , , "MIB Doctors (E-mail)" Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Internal WG Review: Recharter of Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks (roll) X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 14:53:24 -0000 If there are any questions, comments or concerns please let me or Ron know before COB 2/25.=20 Thanks and Regards, Dan=20 -----Original Message----- From: iesg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of IESG Secretary Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 12:29 AM To: iesg@ietf.org; iab@iab.org; jpv@cisco.com; culler@eecs.berkeley.edu Subject: Internal WG Review: Recharter of Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks (roll)=20 A new charter for the Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks working group (roll) in the Routing Area of the IETF is being considered. The draft charter is provided below for your review and comment. Review time is one week. The IETF Secretariat Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks (roll) =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= Current Status: Active Working Group Last Modified: 2009-02-04 Additional information is available at tools.ietf.org/wg/roll=20 Chair(s): JP Vasseur [jpv@cisco.com] David Culler [culler@eecs.berkeley.edu]=20 Routing Area Director(s): Ross Callon [rcallon@juniper.net] David Ward [dward@cisco.com]=20 Routing Area Advisor: David Ward [dward@cisco.com]=20 Mailing Lists: General Discussion: roll@ietf.org To Subscribe: http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll/ Description of Working Group: Low power and Lossy networks (LLNs) are made up of many embedded devices with limited power, memory, and processing resources. They are interconnected by a variety of links, such as IEEE 802.15.4, Bluetooth, Low Power WiFi, wired or other low power PLC (Powerline Communication) links. LLNs are transitioning to an end-to-end IP-based solution to avoid the problem of non-interoperable networks ?interconnected by protocol translation gateways and proxies.=20 Generally speaking, LLNs have at least five distinguishing characteristics:=20 - LLNs operate with a hard, very small bound on state. - In most cases, LLN optimize for saving energy. - Typical traffic patterns are not simply unicast flows (e.g. in some cases most if not all traffic can be point to multipoint). - In most cases, LLNs will be employed over link layers with restricted frame-sizes, thus a routing protocol for LLNs should be specifically adapted for such link layers.=20 - LLN routing protocols have to be very careful when trading off efficiency for generality; many LLN nodes do not have resources to waste. These specific properties cause LLNs to have specific routing requirements.=20 As shown in a protocol survey existing routing protocols (in their current form) such as OSPF, IS-IS, AODV, and OLSR, do not meet these specific routing requirements. The Working Group is focused on routing issues for LLN. There is a wide scope of application areas for LLNs, including industrial =20 monitoring, building automation (HVAC, lighting, access ?control, fire), connected homes, healthcare, environmental monitoring, urban sensor networks (e.g. Smart Grid), asset tracking. The Working Group focuses on routing solutions for a subset of these: industrial, connected home, building and urban? sensor networks for which routing requirements have been specified. These application-specific routing requirement documents will be used for protocol design. The Working Group focuses only on IPv6 routing architectural framework for these application scenarios. The Framework will take into consideration various aspects including high reliability in the presence of time varying loss characteristics and connectivity while permitting low-power operation with =20 very modest memory and CPU pressure in networks potentially comprising a very large number (several thousands) of nodes.=20 The Working Group will pay particular attention to routing security and manageability (e.g., self routing configuration) issues. It will also need to consider the transport characteristic the routing protocol messages will experience. Mechanisms that protect an LLN from congestion collapse or that establish some degree of fairness between concurrent communication sessions are out of scope of the Working Group. It is expected that upper-layer applications utilizing LLNs define appropriate mechanisms. Work Items: - Specification of routing metrics used in path calculation. This includes static and dynamic link/node attributes required for routing in LLNs. - Provide an architectural framework for routing and path selection at Layer 3 (Routing for LLN Architecture) that addresses such issues as whether LLN routing require a distributed and/or centralized path computation models, whether additional hierarchy is necessary and how it is applied. =20 Manageability will be considered with each approach, along with various trade-offs for maintaining low power operation, including the presence of non-trivial loss and networks with a very large number of nodes. - Produce a routing security framework for routing in LLNs. - Protocol work: In light of the application specific routing requirements, the Working Group will either specify a new protocol and/or will select an existing routing protocol (with the appropriate extensions in cooperation with the relevant Working Group). - Documentation of applicability statement of ROLL routing protocols. Goals and Milestones: Done Submit Routing requirements for Industrial applications to the IESG to be considered as an Informational RFC. Done Submit Routing requirements for Connected Home networks applications to the IESG to be considered as an Informational RFC. Done Submit Routing requirements for Building applications to the IESG to be considered as an Informational RFC. Done Submit Routing requirements for Urban networks applications to the IESG to be considered as an Informational RFC. July 2009 Submit Routing metrics for LLNs document to the IESG to be considered as a Proposed Standard. Feb 2009 Submit Protocol Survey to the IESG to be considered as an Informational RFC. April 2009 Submit Security Framework to the IESG to be considered as an Informational RFC May 2009 Submit the Routing for LLNs Architecture document to the IESG as an Informational RFC. July 2009 Submit first draft of ROLL routing protocol specification as Proposed Standard. Nov 2009 Submit first draft of the MIB module of the ROLL routing protocol specification. Feb 2010 Submit the ROLL routing protocol specification to the IESG as Proposed Standard. March 2010 Submit the MIB module of the ROLL routing protocol specification to the IESG as Proposed Standard. April 2010 Evaluate WG progress, recharter or close. From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 22 07:08:40 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F65E3A6AC3; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:08:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.479 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.479 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.120, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RYvvSKS2rEi1; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:08:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A91E3A6A4F; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:08:37 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,250,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="162370637" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 10:08:54 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 10:08:53 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 16:08:32 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Internal WG Review: Recharter of Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration (autoconf) Thread-Index: AcmTiXyymYQ202UcSQuWAIYkTJyCKgBdcWMg From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , , , "MIB Doctors (E-mail)" Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Internal WG Review: Recharter of Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration (autoconf) X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:08:40 -0000 If there are any questions, comments or concerns please let me or Ron know before COB 2/25.=20 Thanks and Regards, Dan -----Original Message----- From: iesg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of IESG Secretary Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 8:31 PM To: iesg@ietf.org; iab@iab.org; ryuji.wakikawa@gmail.com; T.Clausen@computer.org Subject: Internal WG Review: Recharter of Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration (autoconf)=20 A new charter for the Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration working group (autoconf) in the Internet Area of the IETF is being considered. The draft charter is provided below for your review and comment. Review time is one week. The IETF Secretariat Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration (autoconf) ------------------------------------------------------------- Last Modified: 2009-02-18=20 =20 Cuurent Status: Active Working Group=20 =20 Additional information is available at tools.ietf.org/wg/autoconf=20 =20 Chair(s):=20 Ryuji Wakikawa [ryuji.wakikawa@gmail.com] Thomas Clausen [T.Clausen@computer.org]=20 =20 Internet Area Director(s):=20 Jari Arkko [jari.arkko@piuha.net] Mark Townsley [townsley@cisco.com]=20 =20 Internet Area Advisor:=20 Jari Arkko [jari.arkko@piuha.net]=20 =20 Mailing Lists:=20 General Discussion: autoconf@ietf.org To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf Archive:=20 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf/current/maillist.html=20 =20 Description of Working Group:=20 =20 In order to communicate among themselves, ad hoc nodes (refer to RFC 2501) need to configure their network interface(s) with local addresses that are valid within an ad hoc network. Ad hoc nodes may also need to configure globally routable addresses, in order to communicate with devices on the Internet. From the IP layer perspective, an ad hoc network presents itself as a L3 multi-hop network formed over a collection of links.=20 =20 The main purpose of the AUTOCONF WG is to describe the addressing model for ad hoc networks and how nodes in these networks configure their addresses. It is required that such models do not cause problems for ad hoc-unaware parts of the system, such as standard applications running on an ad hoc node or regular Internet nodes attached to the ad hoc nodes. This group's effort may include the development of new protocol mechanisms, should the existing IP autoconfiguration mechanisms be found inadequate. However, the first task of the working group is to describe one practical addressing model for ad hoc networks.=20 =20 Once this sole work item is completed, the group can be rechartered to work on additional issues.=20 =20 Goals and Milestones:=20 =20 Apr 2009 Submit initial draft on address configuration in ad hoc networks Sep 2009 Submit address configuration draft to IESG as Informational or close WG From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 22 07:29:44 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 458793A687A; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:29:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.484 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.484 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.115, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 80fXtq-sQmBD; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:29:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C43C3A6783; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:29:43 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,250,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="162371243" Received: from unknown (HELO nj300815-nj-erheast.avaya.com) ([198.152.6.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 10:29:58 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by nj300815-nj-erheast-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 10:29:58 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 16:29:42 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-btns-connection-latching-08.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmTZE9GkALz4qwMS8W5jK7lNuTbvgBngl3w From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-btns-connection-latching-08.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:29:44 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-btns-connection-latching- 07.txt Technical Summary This document specifies, abstractly, how to interface applications and transport protocols with IPsec so as to create "channels" by latching "connections" (packet flows) to certain IPsec Security Association (SA) parameters for the lifetime of the connections. Connection latching is layered on top of IPsec and does not modify the underlying IPsec architecture. Connection latching can be used to protect applications against accidentally exposing live packet flows to unintended peers, whether as the result of a reconfiguration of IPsec or as the result of using weak peer identity to peer address associations. Weak association of peer ID and peer addresses is at the core of Better Than Nothing Security (BTNS), thus connection latching can add a significant measure of protection to BTNS IPsec nodes. Finally, the availability of IPsec channels will make it possible to use channel binding to IPsec channels. Working Group Summary This document is a product of the Better Than Nothing Security (BTNS) working group.=20 Document Quality A version of Connection Latching is implemented in OpenSolaris. The document has been reviewed by Daniel McDonald who worked on the Connection Latching implementation in OpenSolaris. Personnel The Document Shepherd for this document is Julien Laganier (BTNS WG co-chair). The Responsible Area Director is Tim Polk (Security Area Director). RFC Editor Note (Insert RFC Editor Note here or remove section) IESG Note (Insert IESG Note here or remove section) IANA Note (Insert IANA Note here or remove section) From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 22 07:39:22 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EF163A6AC3; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:39:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.487 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.487 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.112, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nw1CucAhqGjF; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:39:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 361C43A687A; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:39:20 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,250,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="138222456" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 10:39:36 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 10:39:35 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 16:39:24 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-pcn-architecture-09.txt to Informational RFC Thread-Index: AcmTMqcW3Jiy3AK2QKWMB63iXtj30wB0Q2Kg From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-pcn-architecture-09.txt to Informational RFC X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:39:22 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pcn-architecture-09.txt Technical Summary This document describes a general architecture for flow admission and termination based on pre-congestion information in order to protect the quality of service of established inelastic flows within a single DiffServ domain. This document is a product of the PCN working group Working Group Summary This document was the subject of good discussion in the working group and a good consensus was reached that this document describes the PCN architecture Document Quality This document was reviewed by the PCN working group in multiple meetings and by the Document Shepherd (Scott Bradner). Personnel Scott Bradner (sob@harvard.edu) is the Document Shepherd. Lars Eggert (lars.eggert@nokia.com) reviewed this document for the IESG. From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 22 07:59:20 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F0973A6AC4; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:59:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.489 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.489 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.110, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D03M8x2yf9Ga; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:59:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com (nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94FD23A6912; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:59:18 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,250,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="153109845" Received: from unknown (HELO nj300815-nj-erheast.avaya.com) ([198.152.6.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 10:59:34 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by nj300815-nj-erheast-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 10:59:34 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 16:59:16 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-mediactrl-architecture-04.txt to InformationalRFC Thread-Index: AcmS60I4EI9Fb4QkQ56q3oEK34IhAQCGxNTQ From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-mediactrl-architecture-04.txt to InformationalRFC X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:59:20 -0000 OPS-DIR folks (at least) should spend some time reading and commenting this document.=20 Dan -------------------- A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mediactrl-architecture-04 .txt Technical Summary This document specifies an architecture for a media server control protocol (MCP) that enables an application server to control a media server. It addresses aspects of announcements, interactive voice response (IVR), and conferencing media services. Working Group Summary Most of the text in this draft has been stable for a long time. The shepherd doesn't think consensus on this draft is rough. Document Quality Personnel The document shepherd is Spencer Dawkins. Jon Peterson reviewed this document for the IESG. Gen-ART review was provided by Scott Brim. RFC Editor Note (Insert RFC Editor Note here or remove section) IRTF Note (Insert IRTF Note here or remove section) IESG Note (Insert IESG Note here or remove section) IANA Note (Insert IANA Note here or remove section) From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Feb 22 07:59:44 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C46703A6AC4; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:59:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.492 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.492 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.107, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O8T-Gc41DZAA; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:59:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FA5A3A6912; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:59:43 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,250,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="138222885" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 10:59:58 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2009 10:59:57 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 16:59:45 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-mediactrl-vxml-04.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmS6TR6XpOtapxVTaOMLE+8sofGZQCHVdqg From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-mediactrl-vxml-04.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:59:44 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mediactrl-vxml-03.txt Technical Summary his document describes a SIP interface to VoiceXML media services. Commonly, application servers controlling media servers use this protocol for pure VoiceXML processing capabilities. This protocol is an adjunct to the full MEDIACTRL protocol and packages mechanism. Working Group Summary There is consensus in the WG to publish this document. Document Quality This document has had sufficient work group review. In addition, it had external review by the SIP Work Group. There are multiple known interoperable client and server implementations. The document has been checked using idnits and an ABNF checker and passed both checks. Personnel Eric Burger shepherds this document, has reviewed this document, and believes that the -01 version is ready for forwarding to the IESG for publication. The responsible Area Director is Jon Peterson. Gen-ART review was provided by Scott Brim. RFC Editor Note (Insert RFC Editor Note here or remove section) IRTF Note (Insert IRTF Note here or remove section) IESG Note (Insert IESG Note here or remove section) IANA Note (Insert IANA Note here or remove section) From dromasca@avaya.com Tue Feb 24 03:38:13 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C1BF3A687E; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 03:38:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.504 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.504 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.095, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XBS+e1cYkOSL; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 03:38:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com (nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E60703A6837; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 03:37:43 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,258,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="153287421" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 24 Feb 2009 06:38:01 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 24 Feb 2009 06:38:01 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 12:37:39 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-source-attributes-02.txt toProposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmWF7Qx6Jk6fyHnRPOvUMZUiOdT2QAXIhtg From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-source-attributes-02.txt toProposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:38:13 -0000 =20 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-source-attribu tes-02.txt Technical Summary This document defines a general SDP Capability Negotiation framework. It also specifies how to provide attributes and transport protocols as capabilities and negotiate them using the framework. Working Group Summary The MMUSIC Working Group has consensus to publish this document as a Proposed Standard. Document Quality This mechanism feels an important gap in SDP. In particular, it allows the description of specific media sources in SDP messages for RTP Single-Source Multicast [I-D.ietf-avt-rtcpssm]. SSM needs to ensure that receivers' RTP Synchronization Source Identifiers (SSRCs) do not collide with those of media senders. Personnel The Proto Shepherd is Jean-Francois Mule, and the Responsible Area Director is Cullen Jennings. RFC Editor Note Old: The above is the minimum that IANA will accept. Attributes that are expected to see widespread use and interoperability SHOULD be documented with a standards-track RFC that specifies the attribute more precisely. New: The above is the minimum that IANA will accept. The Expert Reviewer will determine if the proposed attributes are expected to see widespread use and interoperability; in that case, a standards-track RFC MUST specify the attributes. IANA Note Jonathan Lennox tentatively assigned as expert From dromasca@avaya.com Wed Feb 25 01:50:28 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 990EE3A69BA; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:50:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.089, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RnJ7efDUzgTE; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:50:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4D703A695E; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:50:27 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,264,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="162698263" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 25 Feb 2009 04:50:47 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 25 Feb 2009 04:50:46 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:50:25 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-behave-turn-13.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmXLklg2ubX8vvQRHyJgjXnj6O+CQAACa/w From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-behave-turn-13.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 09:50:28 -0000 A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-behave-turn-02.txt Technical Summary =20 This specification defines a protocol that allows the host to control the operation of a relay and to exchange IPv4/UDP packets with its peers using the relay. TURN differs from some other relay control protocols in that it allows a client to communicate with multiple peers using a single relay address. The TURN protocol was designed to be used as part of the ICE (Interactive Connectivity Establishment) approach to NAT traversal, though it can be also used without ICE. Working Group Summary =20 There is a strong consensus on publishing this document. Some details have had significant discussion and there has been difficult to find the right trade-off between maintaining transport functionality and the desired implementability.=20 Protocol Quality =20 This specification is well reviewed. It also includes the experience of implementations and their deployment.=20 Personell The WG shepherd is Dan Wing and the Responsible AD Magnus Westerlund Note to RFC Editor =20 (Insert note to RFC Editor here) IESG Note (Insert IESG Note here) IANA Note (Insert IANA Note here) From dromasca@avaya.com Wed Feb 25 01:56:11 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 856243A6945; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:56:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.088, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o2Se1XNo+9FQ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:56:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFC783A6856; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:56:09 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,264,1233550800"; d="scan'208";a="138507397" Received: from unknown (HELO nj300815-nj-erheast.avaya.com) ([198.152.6.5]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 25 Feb 2009 04:56:27 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by nj300815-nj-erheast-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 25 Feb 2009 04:56:27 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:56:11 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Evaluation: draft-ietf-behave-turn-13.txt to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcmXLklg2ubX8vvQRHyJgjXnj6O+CQAACa/wAAAv9IA= From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" , , Subject: Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] Evaluation: draft-ietf-behave-turn-13.txt to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 09:56:11 -0000 The URL in the announcement is incorrect. It should be http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-behave-turn-13.txt Dan =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)=20 > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:50 AM > To: aaa-doctors@ietf.org; ops-dir@ietf.org > Subject: FW: Evaluation: draft-ietf-behave-turn-13.txt to=20 > Proposed Standard=20 >=20 >=20 > A URL of this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-behave-turn-02.txt >=20 > Technical Summary > =20 > This specification defines a protocol that allows the host to=20 > control the operation of a relay and to exchange IPv4/UDP=20 > packets with its peers using the relay. TURN differs from=20 > some other relay control protocols in that it allows a client=20 > to communicate with multiple peers using a single relay address. >=20 > The TURN protocol was designed to be used as part of the ICE=20 > (Interactive Connectivity Establishment) approach to NAT=20 > traversal, though it can be also used without ICE. >=20 > Working Group Summary > =20 > There is a strong consensus on publishing this document. Some=20 > details have had significant discussion and there has been=20 > difficult to find the right trade-off between maintaining=20 > transport functionality and the desired implementability.=20 >=20 > Protocol Quality > =20 > This specification is well reviewed. It also includes the=20 > experience of implementations and their deployment.=20 >=20 > Personell >=20 > The WG shepherd is Dan Wing and the Responsible AD Magnus Westerlund >=20 > Note to RFC Editor > =20 > (Insert note to RFC Editor here) >=20 > IESG Note >=20 > (Insert IESG Note here) >=20 > IANA Note >=20 > (Insert IANA Note here) >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 From shu@nict.go.jp Wed Feb 25 19:38:29 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AAB43A6BCC; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 19:38:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YQSQXZStVZCp; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 19:38:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns1.nict.go.jp (ns1.nict.go.jp [133.243.3.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E09DA3A6BD7; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 19:38:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from gw1.nict.go.jp (gw1 [133.243.18.250]) by ns1.nict.go.jp with ESMTP id n1Q3Yuqk021361; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 12:34:56 +0900 (JST) Received: from gw1.nict.go.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gw1.nict.go.jp with ESMTP id n1Q3Yuow005426; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 12:34:56 +0900 (JST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ssh.nict.go.jp [133.243.3.49]) by gw1.nict.go.jp with ESMTP id n1Q3YtFe005423; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 12:34:55 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <49A60DDE.7030909@nict.go.jp> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 12:34:54 +0900 From: Shu Yamamoto User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" References: <004a01c989ef$a972ec80$0201a8c0@nsnintra.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 03:28:10 -0800 Cc: aaa-doctors@ietf.org, draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements@tools.ietf.org, softwire-chairs@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] REVIEW of draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 03:38:29 -0000 Hello Joe; We are updating document and will submit it shortly. Prior to the submission, we would like to reply to your comments. > I've reviewed draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements-06.txt as part > of the AAA doctors review process. I found some issues that may need to > be addressed. I focused mainly on the AAA issues within the document, > there may be other issues with the document not covered by this review. > > General comments: > > The document contains useful information, but I found it hard to follow. > This is partially because it has been a long time since I looked at L2TP > and softwires and partially because of the organization of the document. > > > The document does discuss AAA authentication with respect to several > deployment scenarios. I found the document unclear as to how the AAA > integration was expected. There are at least 4 different processes > mentioned that can integrate with AAA: PPP, L2TP, IKEv2 and L2/PANA > access authentication. In most cases the document is not clear on what > is integrating with AAA. Its not clear if AAA authentication needs to > be addressed at all these processes or what the relationship between > authentication at different process is. I hink that since L2TPv2 has different authentication processes such as PPP and L2TP authentications, it turns out to be difficult to follow. In addition, they are not sufficiently secured processes. If L2TPv2 is used in unprotected network, the more secured authentication process such as IKE is required as described in RFC3193. In this document, we described IKEv2 with the authentication but not PANA. We will add more text in Section 3.4.1 to clearly define the usage of PPP, L2TP and IKEv2 and AAA integration. > Is a binding necessary between > the AAA authentication and an encrypted tunnel? In some cases, it is not necessarily. But RFC4935 softwire problem statement states the softwire solution must be able to be integrated with common deployed AAA solutions. > Although trust relationships are identified the document does not define > the details what risks are assumed under the various models. This > information helps to evaluate and manage the risk associated with the > trust relationship. > We will describe the risks in detail for three trust relationship scenarios indicated in Figure 1 of the document. > Below are some specific comments on the document: > > 1. section 3.2 > > This section describes a proxied trust model, but it does not provide > the details needed to evaluate and manage the risk associated with the > trust relationship. For example it is state the visited AAA and home > AAA have a trust relationship: what does one rely upon the other to do? > What are the risks if the trust relationship is violated? Are there > suggested ways to mitigate this risk? > We will rewrite this section as the risks associated with the trust relationship are cleraly defined for three specific acenarios. In terms of the trust relationship between the visted AAA and the home AAA, the AAA proxy thret model will be addressed associated with the roaming agreement between them. > In section 3.2, the document makes the following statement: > > "The SI and the visited AAA server do not usually have a trust > relationship; > however, if the SI can confirm that the home AAA server is involved > with the authentication of the SI and the visited AAA server does not > alter security information from the home AAA server, the visited AAA > server can be trusted by the SI." > > I'm not quite clear on what this sentence is stating. There is no > direct connection made between this statement and mechanisms listed in > the document. It does not appear that the SI can confirm the home AAA > server is involved using the mechanisms in the document or confirm that > the visited AAA server does not alter the security information (what is > security information). > > This section also states: > > " The communication between the SI, the home and visited AAA servers > must be protected. " > > In general it doesn't appear that the SI and the home and visited AAA > servers communicate directly (I don't think the SI is a AAA client). > This needs to be clarified as to what process are involved in the > communication and what exactly needs to be protected. > > 2. Section 3.4.1 > > Different authentication methods have different security properties. > For example, there are tremendous differences in security between PAP > and CHAP or between EAP-TLS and CHAP. It seems there should be some > discussion of this. We will add the text on the security risks and discussion for these different authentications. > I'm also a little bit surprised that mutual > authentication is only a SHOULD for the protocol (deployments may choose > not to enable it, but it seems the protocol should support it). > Since the mutual authentication should be used in the specific cases, we will change the sentence as you suggested. > 3. Section 3.5 > > Its not clear to me how the tunnel is authenticated. I think this > section needs to be clearer about the different authentication choices. > It covers several choices; pre-shared key, certificate, EAP, but doesn't > really describe where or how they should be used, or how they affect (or > don't affect) authentication in other processes. We will add more text of where or how these three different authentication methods should be used. > Some of the drafts > (draft-eronen-ipsec-ikev2-eap-auth-05) mentioned in the section have > expired long ago. > We will remove this draft as a reference. Regards, Shu > > Joe > > >