
From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Wed Feb  7 19:21:27 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A38E12D77C for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 19:21:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qdwxIWT7xVCP for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 19:21:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0866126D45 for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 19:21:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A6D8B816F2; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 19:21:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 3E8A0B816E6; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 19:21:15 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180208032115.3E8A0B816E6@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed,  7 Feb 2018 19:21:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8312_on_CUBIC_for_Fast_Long-Distance_Net?= =?utf-8?q?works?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, tcpm@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8312

        Title:      CUBIC for Fast Long-Distance Networks 
        Author:     I. Rhee, 
                    L. Xu,
                    S. Ha, 
                    A. Zimmermann,
                    L. Eggert, 
                    R. Scheffenegger
        Status:     Informational
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    rhee@ncsu.edu, 
                    xu@unl.edu, 
                    sangtae.ha@colorado.edu,  
                    alexander.zimmermann@rwth-aachen.de, 
                    lars@netapp.com,  
                    rs.ietf@gmx.at
        Pages:      18
        Characters: 42194
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-tcpm-cubic-07.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8312

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8312

CUBIC is an extension to the current TCP standards.  It differs from
the current TCP standards only in the congestion control algorithm on
the sender side.  In particular, it uses a cubic function instead of
a linear window increase function of the current TCP standards to
improve scalability and stability under fast and long-distance
networks.  CUBIC and its predecessor algorithm have been adopted as
defaults by Linux and have been used for many years.  This document
provides a specification of CUBIC to enable third-party
implementations and to solicit community feedback through
experimentation on the performance of CUBIC.

This document is a product of the TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group of the IETF.


INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community.
It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
this memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Wed Feb  7 23:06:04 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 312561200E5 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 23:06:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DpsA6t9CvUj1 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 23:06:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9B5012D85E for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 23:06:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10C67B80D9A; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 23:05:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 0976EB80D98; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 23:05:52 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180208070552.0976EB80D98@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed,  7 Feb 2018 23:05:52 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8303_on_On_the_Usage_of_Transport_Featur?= =?utf-8?q?es_Provided_by_IETF_Transport_Protocols?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, taps@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8303

        Title:      On the Usage of Transport 
                    Features Provided by IETF Transport Protocols 
        Author:     M. Welzl, 
                    M. Tuexen,
                    N. Khademi
        Status:     Informational
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    michawe@ifi.uio.no, 
                    tuexen@fh-muenster.de, 
                    naeemk@ifi.uio.no
        Pages:      56
        Characters: 117774
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-09.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8303

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8303

This document describes how the transport protocols Transmission
Control Protocol (TCP), MultiPath TCP (MPTCP), Stream Control
Transmission Protocol (SCTP), User Datagram Protocol (UDP), and
Lightweight User Datagram Protocol (UDP-Lite) expose services to
applications and how an application can configure and use the
features that make up these services.  It also discusses the service
provided by the Low Extra Delay Background Transport (LEDBAT)
congestion control mechanism.  The description results in a set of
transport abstractions that can be exported in a transport services
(TAPS) API.

This document is a product of the Transport Services Working Group of the IETF.


INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community.
It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
this memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Wed Feb  7 23:06:27 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E65912D877 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 23:06:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sexsLQoLVPw9 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 23:06:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 053EB12D88A for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 23:06:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E42EB80DA1; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 23:05:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id B4C94B80DA1; Wed,  7 Feb 2018 23:05:55 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180208070555.B4C94B80DA1@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed,  7 Feb 2018 23:05:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8304_on_Transport_Features_of_the_User_D?= =?utf-8?q?atagram_Protocol_=28UDP=29_and_Lightweight_UDP_=28UDP-Lite=29?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, taps@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8304

        Title:      Transport Features of the User Datagram
                    Protocol (UDP) and Lightweight UDP (UDP-Lite)
        Author:     G. Fairhurst, 
                    T. Jones
        Status:     Informational
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk, 
                    tom@erg.abdn.ac.uk
        Pages:      20
        Characters: 49343
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp-07.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8304

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8304

This is an informational document that describes the transport
protocol interface primitives provided by the User Datagram Protocol
(UDP) and the Lightweight User Datagram Protocol (UDP-Lite) transport
protocols.  It identifies the datagram services exposed to
applications and how an application can configure and use the
features offered by the Internet datagram transport service.  RFC
8303 documents the usage of transport features provided by IETF
transport protocols, describing the way UDP, UDP-Lite, and other
transport protocols expose their services to applications and how an
application can configure and use the features that make up these
services.  This document provides input to and context for that
document, as well as offers a road map to documentation that may help
users of the UDP and UDP-Lite protocols.

This document is a product of the Transport Services Working Group of the IETF.


INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community.
It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
this memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Tue Feb 13 17:12:45 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C481612D944 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:12:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UwOr4dDbGVaB for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:12:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DC3412706D for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:12:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0412FB80F99; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:12:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 4D321B80F5F; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:12:25 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180214011225.4D321B80F5F@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:12:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8315_on_Cancel-Locks_in_Netnews_Articles?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8315

        Title:      Cancel-Locks in Netnews Articles 
        Author:     M. Baeuerle
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    michael.baeuerle@stz-e.de
        Pages:      20
        Characters: 42347
        Updates:    RFC 5537

        I-D Tag:    draft-baeuerle-netnews-cancel-lock-09.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8315

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8315

This document defines an extension to the Netnews Article Format that
may be used to authenticate the withdrawal of existing articles.
This document updates RFC 5537.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Tue Feb 13 17:13:09 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4944C12EACA for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:13:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OmL6spFc2NEF for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:13:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E42FB12EABF for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:13:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 702D4B80FC2; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:12:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 3E6CEB80FB3; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:12:39 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org, irtf-announce@irtf.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180214011239.3E6CEB80FB3@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:12:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8316_on_Autonomic_Networking_Use_Case_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Distributed_Detection_of_Service_Level_Agreement_=28SLA=29_Vi?= =?utf-8?q?olations?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, nmrg@irtf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8316

        Title:      Autonomic Networking Use Case for 
                    Distributed Detection of Service Level Agreement 
                    (SLA) Violations 
        Author:     J. Nobre,
                    L. Granville,
                    A. Clemm,
                    A. Gonzalez Prieto
        Status:     Informational
        Stream:     IRTF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    jcnobre@unisinos.br, 
                    granville@inf.ufrgs.br, 
                    ludwig@clemm.org,
                    agonzalezpri@vmware.com
        Pages:      16
        Characters: 40002
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-irtf-nmrg-autonomic-sla-violation-detection-13.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8316

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8316

This document describes an experimental use case that employs
autonomic networking for the monitoring of Service Level Agreements
(SLAs).  The use case is for detecting violations of SLAs in a
distributed fashion.  It strives to optimize and dynamically adapt
the autonomic deployment of active measurement probes in a way that
maximizes the likelihood of detecting service-level violations with a
given resource budget to perform active measurements.  This
optimization and adaptation should be done without any outside
guidance or intervention.

This document is a product of the IRTF Network Management Research
Group (NMRG).  It is published for informational purposes.

This document is a product of the Network Management Research Group of the IRTF.


INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community.
It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
this memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce, rfc-dist and IRTF-Announce lists.To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
  https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/irtf-announce

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Tue Feb 13 17:13:44 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD12612EAD3 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:13:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r6SvCQENLmW6 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:13:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A83C712EAD4 for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:13:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3254B80FD8; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:13:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id AFABDB80FFE; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:13:00 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180214011300.AFABDB80FFE@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:13:00 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8325_on_Mapping_Diffserv_to_IEEE_802=2E1?= =?utf-8?q?1?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, tsvwg@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8325

        Title:      Mapping Diffserv to IEEE 802.11 
        Author:     T. Szigeti,
                    J. Henry,
                    F. Baker
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    szigeti@cisco.com, 
                    jerhenry@cisco.com, 
                    fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com
        Pages:      37
        Characters: 91530
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-tsvwg-ieee-802-11-11.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8325

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8325

As Internet traffic is increasingly sourced from and destined to
wireless endpoints, it is crucial that Quality of Service (QoS) be
aligned between wired and wireless networks; however, this is not
always the case by default.  This document specifies a set of
mappings from Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) to IEEE
802.11 User Priority (UP) to reconcile the marking recommendations
offered by the IETF and the IEEE so as to maintain consistent QoS
treatment between wired and IEEE 802.11 wireless networks.

This document is a product of the Transport Area Working Group Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Wed Feb 14 17:34:22 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 201F612D86C for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:34:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5fuWjHCQp1ID for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:34:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE8E81270AC for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:34:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55062B8125C; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:34:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 69D14B81257; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:33:59 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180215013359.69D14B81257@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:33:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8224_on_Authenticated_Identity_Managemen?= =?utf-8?q?t_in_the_Session_Initiation_Protocol_=28SIP=29?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, stir@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8224

        Title:      Authenticated Identity Management in the 
                    Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) 
        Author:     J. Peterson, 
                    C. Jennings,
                    E. Rescorla, 
                    C. Wendt
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    jon.peterson@neustar.biz, 
                    fluffy@cisco.com, 
                    ekr@rtfm.com,  
                    chris-ietf@chriswendt.net
        Pages:      46
        Characters: 118924
        Obsoletes:  RFC 4474

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-stir-rfc4474bis-16.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8224

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8224

The baseline security mechanisms in the Session Initiation Protocol
(SIP) are inadequate for cryptographically assuring the identity of
the end users that originate SIP requests, especially in an
interdomain context.  This document defines a mechanism for securely
identifying originators of SIP requests.  It does so by defining a
SIP header field for conveying a signature used for validating the
identity and for conveying a reference to the credentials of the
signer.

This document obsoletes RFC 4474.

This document is a product of the Secure Telephone Identity Revisited Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Wed Feb 14 17:35:03 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4655712D87D for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FOIjW8iXNdCW for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FE4612D874 for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:34:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF3C6B81272; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:34:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 457B7B81270; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:34:22 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180215013422.457B7B81270@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:34:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8225_on_PASSporT=3A_Personal_Assertion_T?= =?utf-8?q?oken?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, stir@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8225

        Title:      PASSporT: Personal Assertion Token 
        Author:     C. Wendt,
                    J. Peterson
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    chris-ietf@chriswendt.net, 
                    jon.peterson@neustar.biz
        Pages:      25
        Characters: 48751
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-stir-passport-11.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8225

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8225

This document defines a method for creating and validating a token
that cryptographically verifies an originating identity or, more
generally, a URI or telephone number representing the originator of
personal communications.  The Personal Assertion Token, PASSporT, is
cryptographically signed to protect the integrity of the identity of
the originator and to verify the assertion of the identity
information at the destination.  The cryptographic signature is
defined with the intention that it can confidently verify the
originating persona even when the signature is sent to the
destination party over an insecure channel.  PASSporT is particularly
useful for many personal-communications applications over IP networks
and other multi-hop interconnection scenarios where the originating
and destination parties may not have a direct trusted relationship.

This document is a product of the Secure Telephone Identity Revisited Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Wed Feb 14 17:35:45 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2CBF12D883 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Uf73k5swNebJ for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE90B12D88C for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53401B81287; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:34:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id AC43BB81283; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:34:45 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180215013445.AC43BB81283@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:34:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8226_on_Secure_Telephone_Identity_Creden?= =?utf-8?q?tials=3A_Certificates?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, stir@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8226

        Title:      Secure Telephone Identity Credentials: Certificates 
        Author:     J. Peterson, 
                    S. Turner
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018 
        Mailbox:    jon.peterson@neustar.biz, 
                    sean@sn3rd.com
        Pages:      24
        Characters: 54838
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-stir-certificates-17.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8226

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8226

In order to prevent the impersonation of telephone numbers on the
Internet, some kind of credential system needs to exist that
cryptographically asserts authority over telephone numbers.  This
document describes the use of certificates in establishing authority
over telephone numbers, as a component of a broader architecture for
managing telephone numbers as identities in protocols like SIP.

This document is a product of the Secure Telephone Identity Revisited Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Wed Feb 14 17:36:16 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2992712D892 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:36:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2gA8jKXn4r8z for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:36:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 340C512D889 for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9470B81290; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id CA11DB81290; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:02 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180215013502.CA11DB81290@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8322_on_Resource-Oriented_Lightweight_In?= =?utf-8?q?formation_Exchange_=28ROLIE=29?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: mile@ietf.org, drafts-update-ref@iana.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8322

        Title:      Resource-Oriented Lightweight Information Exchange (ROLIE) 
        Author:     J. Field, 
                    S. Banghart,
                    D. Waltermire
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    jfield@pivotal.io, 
                    stephen.banghart@nist.gov, 
                    david.waltermire@nist.gov
        Pages:      43
        Characters: 94368
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-mile-rolie-16.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8322

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8322

This document defines a resource-oriented approach for security
automation information publication, discovery, and sharing.  Using
this approach, producers may publish, share, and exchange
representations of software descriptors, security incidents, attack
indicators, software vulnerabilities, configuration checklists, and
other security automation information as web-addressable resources.
Furthermore, consumers and other stakeholders may access and search
this security information as needed, establishing a rapid and
on-demand information exchange network for restricted internal use or
public access repositories.  This specification extends the Atom
Publishing Protocol and Atom Syndication Format to transport and
share security automation resource representations.

This document is a product of the Managed Incident Lightweight Exchange Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Wed Feb 14 17:36:52 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 330AA12D963 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:36:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Bjc1MMLAjhyg for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:36:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B73C12AF77 for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 210C5B81278; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 3E44EB8129C; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:18 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180215013518.3E44EB8129C@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8323_on_CoAP_=28Constrained_Application_?= =?utf-8?q?Protocol=29_over_TCP=2C_TLS=2C_and_WebSockets?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, core@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8323

        Title:      CoAP (Constrained Application Protocol) over 
                    TCP, TLS, and WebSockets 
        Author:     C. Bormann, 
                    S. Lemay,
                    H. Tschofenig,
                    K. Hartke,
                    B. Silverajan,
                    B. Raymor, Ed.
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    cabo@tzi.org, 
                    slemay@zebra.com, 
                    Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net,
                    hartke@tzi.org, 
                    Bilhanan.Silverajan@tut.fi,
                    brianraymor@hotmail.com
        Pages:      54
        Characters: 110771
        Updates:    RFC 7641, RFC 7959

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-core-coap-tcp-tls-11.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8323

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8323

The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP), although inspired by
HTTP, was designed to use UDP instead of TCP.  The message layer of
CoAP over UDP includes support for reliable delivery, simple
congestion control, and flow control.

Some environments benefit from the availability of CoAP carried over
reliable transports such as TCP or Transport Layer Security (TLS).
This document outlines the changes required to use CoAP over TCP,
TLS, and WebSockets transports.  It also formally updates RFC 7641
for use with these transports and RFC 7959 to enable the use of
larger messages over a reliable transport.

This document is a product of the Constrained RESTful Environments Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Wed Feb 14 17:37:31 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2D0D12D87B for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:37:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CWReNmceXEGx for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:37:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1A1512D88F for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BC02B812A5; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 1F4C7B812A5; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:32 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180215013532.1F4C7B812A5@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8330_on_OSPF_Traffic_Engineering_=28OSPF?= =?utf-8?q?-TE=29_Link_Availability_Extension_for_Links_with_Variable_Disc?= =?utf-8?q?rete_Bandwidth?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, ccamp@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8330

        Title:      OSPF Traffic Engineering (OSPF-TE) Link 
                    Availability Extension for Links with Variable 
                    Discrete Bandwidth 
        Author:     H. Long, 
                    M. Ye,
                    G. Mirsky,
                    A. D'Alessandro,
                    H. Shah
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    longhao@huawei.com, 
                    amy.yemin@huawei.com, 
                    gregimirsky@gmail.com,  
                    alessandro.dalessandro@telecomitalia.it, 
                    hshah@ciena.com
        Pages:      10
        Characters: 19206
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-13.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8330

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8330

A network may contain links with variable discrete bandwidth, e.g.,
microwave and copper.  The bandwidth of such links may change
discretely in response to a changing external environment.  The word
"availability" is typically used to describe such links during network
planning.  This document defines a new type of Generalized Switching
Capability-Specific Information (SCSI) TLV to extend the Generalized
Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Open Shortest Path First (OSPF)
routing protocol.  The extension can be used for route computation in
a network that contains links with variable discrete bandwidth.
Note that this document only covers the mechanisms by which the
availability information is distributed.  The mechanisms by which
availability information of a link is determined and the use of the
distributed information for route computation are outside the scope
of this document.  It is intended that technology-specific documents
will reference this document to describe specific uses.

This document is a product of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Tue Feb 20 21:40:09 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E82E912E86E for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:40:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iMA_ZokeWpkb for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:40:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7A42124D37 for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:40:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4B0FB81837; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:40:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 14C8BB81822; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:40:03 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180221054003.14C8BB81822@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:40:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8331_on_RTP_Payload_for_Society_of_Motio?= =?utf-8?q?n_Picture_and_Television_Engineers_=28SMPTE=29_ST_291-1_Ancilla?= =?utf-8?q?ry_Data?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, payload@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8331

        Title:      RTP Payload for Society of 
                    Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) 
                    ST 291-1 Ancillary Data 
        Author:     T. Edwards
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    thomas.edwards@fox.com
        Pages:      20
        Characters: 47110
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-payload-rtp-ancillary-14.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8331

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8331

This memo describes a Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) payload
format for the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers
(SMPTE) ancillary space (ANC) data, as defined by SMPTE ST 291-1.
SMPTE ANC data is generally used along with professional video
formats to carry a range of ancillary data types, including time
code, Closed Captioning, and the Active Format Description (AFD).

This document is a product of the Audio/Video Transport Payloads Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC
_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Thu Feb 22 17:33:43 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68ED5128D2E for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:33:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RVsXIruzZQTa for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:33:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3256612422F for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:33:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24411B80C59; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:33:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 78371B80C56; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:33:34 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180223013334.78371B80C56@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:33:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8319_on_Support_for_Adjustable_Maximum_R?= =?utf-8?q?outer_Lifetimes_per_Link?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, ipv6@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8319

        Title:      Support for Adjustable Maximum Router 
                    Lifetimes per Link 
        Author:     S. Krishnan, 
                    J. Korhonen,
                    S. Chakrabarti,
                    E. Nordmark,
                    A. Yourtchenko
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    suresh@kaloom.com, 
                    jouni.nospam@gmail.com, 
                    samita.chakrabarti@verizon.com,
                    nordmark@acm.org, 
                    ayourtch@cisco.com
        Pages:      7
        Characters: 12760
        Updates:    RFC 4861

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-6man-maxra-04.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8319

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8319

The IPv6 Neighbor Discovery protocol specifies the maximum time
allowed between sending unsolicited multicast Router Advertisements (RAs)
from a router interface as well as the maximum router lifetime.  It
also allows the limits to be overridden by documents that are specific
to the link layer.  This document allows for overriding these values on a
per-link basis.

This document specifies updates to the IPv6 Neighbor Discovery
Protocol (RFC 4861) to increase the maximum time allowed between
sending unsolicited multicast RAs from a router interface as well as
to increase the maximum router lifetime.

This document is a product of the IPv6 Maintenance Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Thu Feb 22 17:34:13 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B19B51250B8 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f7LevytKU01V for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C775127775 for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95F30B80C69; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:33:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 248C3B80C65; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:33:50 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180223013350.248C3B80C65@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:33:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8320_on_LDP_Extensions_to_Support_Maxima?= =?utf-8?q?lly_Redundant_Trees?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, mpls@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8320

        Title:      LDP Extensions to Support Maximally 
                    Redundant Trees 
        Author:     A. Atlas,
                    K. Tiruveedhula,
                    C. Bowers, 
                    J. Tantsura,
                    IJ. Wijnands
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    akatlas@juniper.net, 
                    kishoret@juniper.net, 
                    cbowers@juniper.net,
                    jefftant.ietf@gmail.com, 
                    ice@cisco.com
        Pages:      21
        Characters: 47801
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mrt-07.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8320

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8320

This document specifies extensions to the Label Distribution Protocol
(LDP) to support the creation of Label Switched Paths (LSPs) for
Maximally Redundant Trees (MRTs).  A prime use of MRTs is for unicast
and multicast IP/LDP Fast Reroute, which we will refer to as
"MRT-FRR".

The sole protocol extension to LDP is simply the ability to advertise
an MRT Capability.  This document describes that extension and the
associated behavior expected for Label Switching Routers (LSRs) and
Label Edge Routers (LERs) advertising the MRT Capability.

MRT-FRR uses LDP multi-topology extensions, so three multi-topology
IDs have been allocated from the MPLS MT-ID space.

This document is a product of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Thu Feb 22 17:34:55 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A58A129C70 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id USczrpSW0ysE for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D9AA12EAD8 for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3D84B80C89; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 3D6E5B80C7D; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:07 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180223013407.3D6E5B80C7D@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:07 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8329_on_Framework_for_Interface_to_Netwo?= =?utf-8?q?rk_Security_Functions?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: i2nsf@ietf.org, drafts-update-ref@iana.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8329

        Title:      Framework for Interface to Network 
                    Security Functions 
        Author:     D. Lopez,
                    E. Lopez,
                    L. Dunbar,
                    J. Strassner,
                    R. Kumar
        Status:     Informational
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    diego.r.lopez@telefonica.com, 
                    ed@curveballnetworks.com, 
                    Linda.dunbar@huawei.com, 
                    john.sc.strassner@huawei.com, 
                    rakeshkumarcloud@gmail.com
        Pages:      25
        Characters: 56930
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-i2nsf-framework-10.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8329

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8329

This document describes the framework for Interface to Network
Security Functions (I2NSF) and defines a reference model (including
major functional components) for I2NSF.  Network Security Functions
(NSFs) are packet-processing engines that inspect and optionally
modify packets traversing networks, either directly or in the context
of sessions to which the packet is associated.

This document is a product of the Interface to Network Security Functions Working Group of the IETF.


INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community.
It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
this memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Thu Feb 22 17:35:08 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EB9012E8B0 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:35:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pmUh0TACNDoT for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:35:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 726D612EA91 for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E7EEB80C94; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 5630FB80C92; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:23 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180223013423.5630FB80C92@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:34:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8335_on_PROBE=3A_A_Utility_for_Probing_I?= =?utf-8?q?nterfaces?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, int-area@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8335

        Title:      PROBE: A Utility for Probing 
                    Interfaces 
        Author:     R. Bonica,
                    R. Thomas,
                    J. Linkova,
                    C. Lenart,
                    M. Boucadair
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    rbonica@juniper.net, 
                    rejithomas@juniper.net, 
                    furry@google.com,
                    chris.lenart@verizon.com, 
                    mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
        Pages:      19
        Characters: 35084
        Updates:    RFC 4884

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-intarea-probe-10.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8335

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8335

This document describes a network diagnostic tool called PROBE.
PROBE is similar to PING in that it can be used to query the status
of a probed interface, but it differs from PING in that it does not
require bidirectional connectivity between the probing and probed
interfaces.  Instead, PROBE requires bidirectional connectivity
between the probing interface and a proxy interface.  The proxy
interface can reside on the same node as the probed interface, or it
can reside on a node to which the probed interface is directly
connected.  This document updates RFC 4884.

This document is a product of the Internet Area Working Group Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the 
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this 
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org

From rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org  Tue Feb 27 16:49:02 2018
Return-Path: <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A1512EAD7 for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:49:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sVVmlMpnhure for <ietfarch-rfc-dist-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:49:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BFDA12E8A8 for <rfc-dist-archive-yuw6Xa6hiena@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:49:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D839B800AE; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:48:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 1DA5FB800A1; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:48:49 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20180228004849.1DA5FB800A1@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:48:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rfc-dist] =?utf-8?q?RFC_8324_on_DNS_Privacy=2C_Authorization=2C_?= =?utf-8?q?Special_Uses=2C_Encoding=2C_Characters=2C_Matching=2C_and_Root_?= =?utf-8?q?Structure=3A_Time_for_Another_Look=3F?=
X-BeenThere: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Announcements <rfc-dist.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-dist/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist>, <mailto:rfc-dist-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-dist" <rfc-dist-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        
        RFC 8324

        Title:      DNS Privacy, Authorization, Special Uses, 
                    Encoding, Characters, Matching, and Root Structure: 
                    Time for Another Look? 
        Author:     J. Klensin
        Status:     Informational
        Stream:     Independent
        Date:       February 2018
        Mailbox:    john-ietf@jck.com
        Pages:      29
        Characters: 75196
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-klensin-dns-function-considerations-05.txt

        URL:        https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8324

        DOI:        10.17487/RFC8324

The basic design of the Domain Name System was completed almost 30
years ago.  The last half of that period has been characterized by
significant changes in requirements and expectations, some of which
either require changes to how the DNS is used or can be accommodated
only poorly or not at all.  This document asks the question of
whether it is time to either redesign and replace the DNS to match
contemporary requirements and expectations (rather than continuing to
try to design and implement incremental patches that are not fully
satisfactory) or draw some clear lines about functionality that is
not really needed or that should be performed in some other way.


INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community.
It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
this memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.


The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC


_______________________________________________
rfc-dist mailing list
rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
http://www.rfc-editor.org
