|
Just a note to the WG to summarize where I think we are on various work items. The hope is that this note will disclose any disconnects which could lead to things falling through the cracks. Issue List (recently updated): http://www.drizzle.com/~aboba/RADEXT/ 1. Completed IESG Review: Revision Needed My notes show two documents in this category: Design Guidelines and Status Server. In both cases, it appears to me that the editor (Alan DeKok) is holding the token. Design Guidelines This document currently has no open IESG DISCUSSes. With respect to Design Guidelines, we have two issues in the Pending state: 325 and 327. Alan has updated the draft to -13, and has posted a request for review of the changes to address both issues. There is a discussion of Issue 327 in progress. In the absence of further discussion on Issue 325, we are going to assume that it has been resolved. Next steps: WG participants are requested to review the Design Guidelines document and post their thoughts to the list: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-radext-design Status Server This document currently has IESG DISCUSS comments open (see Issue #333), in addition to IETF last call comments (Issue # 330). Next steps: The editor need to address the open issues, preferably by posting a document revision. 2. AD Review: Revision Needed My notes show one document in this category: RADIUS over TCP, with the editor (Alan DeKok) holding the token.. There are two open issues relating to the Dan's AD review: Issues 331 (technical) and 332 (editorial). Next steps: The editor needs to address the open issues, preferably by posting a document revision. 3. Completed RADEXT WG Last Call: Pending PROTO Writeup My notes show one document in this category: Tunnel Type Values, with Dave Nelson holding the token. In the past, there had been some discussion about whether RFC 3575 intended to change the IANA allocation process for Tunnel-Type values to "expert review", even though it did not include RFC 2868 in the Updates: header. If so, could an errata if approved make this document unnecessary (given that an expert review has already been done)? Next steps: Dave Nelson to complete the PROTO writeup. 4. Completed RADEXT WG last call: Revision needed. My notes show one document in this category: IPv6 Access. There is one issue outstanding from the RADEXT WG last call: Issue #335. Next steps: The editor needs to address the open issues, preferably by posting a document revision. 5. Completed RADEXT WG last call: PROTO writeup. My notes show one document in this category: RADIUS over TLS. There are no outstanding issues from RADEXT WG last call. Next steps: Bernard Aboba to complete PROTO writeup; RADEXT WG participants to read the document and post comments to the list. |