Re: draft-richardson-ipsec-opportunistic-11 again]

[RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>]

All,

We still have not heard a response regarding this document.  Please
let us know if this draft will be reviewed in the WG, or if the RFC
Editor should be reviewing this document. 

Thank you.

RFC Editor



----- Forwarded message from RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> -----

Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 09:41:51 -0800
From: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
To: Bob Braden <braden@ISI.EDU>
Cc: mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca, smb@research.att.com, iesg@ietf.org,
   RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Subject: Re: draft-richardson-ipsec-opportunistic-11 again
In-Reply-To: <200302280032.AAA10948@gra.isi.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1023.1 required=5.0
	tests=AWL,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,
	      SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_AGENT,USER_AGENT_MUTT
	version=2.43
X-Spam-Level: 

Greetings,

We have not received a response to this question, are are unsure as to
whether or not the RFC Editor should be reviewing this document.
Should this documenmt be on the standards track?

Thanks,

RFC Editor

On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 12:32:03AM +0000, Bob Braden wrote:
>   *> >
>   *> >  d) It certainly (and I thought intentionally) does not fit into the 
>   *> >     charter of IPSECKEY, so I'm not sure how it would get to PS.
>   *> >
> 
> Well, one way would be for the IESG to Last Call it as a non-WG
> submission.  Might this make more sense than an individual submission
> to the RFC Editor in this case?
> 
> RFC Editor/bb

----- End forwarded message -----