Subject: Re: [Lwip] Kathleen Moriarty's No Record on draft-ietf-lwig-ikev2-minimal-05: (with COMMENT)

From: Tero Kivinen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:12:16 +0200

Kathleen Moriarty writes:
> > Nit that I'm sure the RFC editor would have caught:
> > Last paragraph at the bottom of Page 4, so is repeated:
> > "Minimal implementations only need to support the role of initiator,
> >    so so it"

Fixed in my xml copy, I will wait to see if there will be other
changes before making new version.
-- 
[email-masked]

---

From: "Kathleen Moriarty" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2015 15:17:37 -0800

Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lwig-ikev2-minimal-05: No Record

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lwig-ikev2-minimal/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm fine with this being informational since it just describes a proof of
concept implementation specific to lwig use cases of an existing
standards track RFC.  It does explicitly state that the referenced RFC is
normative and any updates to that RFC would likely not apply to this one
unless an updated POC is done and that might mean a new draft (I
suspect).

---

From: Kathleen Moriarty <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 18:19:18 -0500

I did change this to no objection as soon as I noticed I forgot to
click the button.

-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen