Re: R41 in draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-07

[james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>]

On Jul 28, 2009, at 19:58, Stark, Barbara wrote:
> I thought that the discussion in today's meeting led to the conclusion
> that R41 would be removed. Did I hear wrong?

I'd say that I'm seeing enough objection to the idea on the list that  
I'm not confident that I should remove it from the draft yet.  Also,  
the nice gentleman-- whose name I missed-- who self-identified as a  
member of the IESG, expressed the view that R41 as written isn't an  
obvious problem for the draft.

In a one-on-one discussion after the session adjourned, he generally  
agreed with the principle goal of R41, which is an attempt to put a  
foot down with "this protocol MUST have a specification that meets the  
requirements of [RFC3979], [RFC4879] and [RFC5378]."  That's the part  
that had me worrying about the draft getting held up in IESG review,  
and I think I'm not so worried anymore.


--
james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>
member of technical staff, communications engineering