From joelja@bogus.com Tue Dec 1 23:50:10 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC7BF3A6A32 for ; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 23:50:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id soph14FnJ9wj for ; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 23:50:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2D223A683D for ; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 23:50:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.151] (c-98-234-104-156.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [98.234.104.156]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nB27no2m015821 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 2 Dec 2009 07:49:52 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <4B161C1D.5020500@bogus.com> Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2009 23:49:49 -0800 From: Joel Jaeggli User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "'opsec@ietf.org'" , Joe Abley , Fernando Gont X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Wed, 02 Dec 2009 07:49:54 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [OPSEC] Working Group last call for draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 07:50:10 -0000 This is the working group Last call for draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security. Please review the current draft: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security-01 Deadline for Comments is 0000 UTC, Wed DEC 16th 2009. As per the minutes the thinking is that this draft will be aimed at informational status but that we will also solicit feedback via an ietf-wide last call. thanks joel From A.Hoenes@TR-Sys.de Fri Dec 4 14:06:13 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03E773A687C for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 14:06:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.736 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.736 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.485, BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SE9QbdFkCUQV for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 14:06:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from TR-Sys.de (gateway.tr-sys.de [213.178.172.147]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E19AF3A63C9 for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 14:06:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from ZEUS.TR-Sys.de by w. with ESMTP ($Revision: 1.37.109.26 $/16.3.2) id AA265144284; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 23:04:44 +0100 Received: (from ah@localhost) by z.TR-Sys.de (8.9.3 (PHNE_25183)/8.7.3) id XAA27190; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 23:04:42 +0100 (MEZ) From: Alfred =?hp-roman8?B?SM5uZXM=?= Message-Id: <200912042204.XAA27190@TR-Sys.de> To: opsec@ietf.org Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 23:04:42 +0100 (MEZ) X-Mailer: ELM [$Revision: 1.17.214.3 $] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=hp-roman8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [OPSEC] Working Group last call for draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 22:06:13 -0000 At Tue, 01 Dec 2009 23:49:49 -0800, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > This is the working group Last call for draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security. > > Please review the current draft: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security-01 > > Deadline for Comments is 0000 UTC, Wed DEC 16th 2009. > > As per the minutes the thinking is that this draft will be aimed at > informational status but that we will also solicit feedback via an > ietf-wide last call. > > thanks > joel Folks, returning to opsec after a longer disconnect ... I support this work very much, and I would like to indicate that, as promised earlier this year, I'm already working on a detailed independent review -- both technical and editorial -- of the draft. Four parts of the review (covering a detailed walk-though of sections 1..3 and 5.. of the draft, with a total volume of >2500 lines so far) already have been shipped to Fernando during the last couple of weeks, and this material is under ongoing p2p discussion. Unfortunately, I've been held off in entering the remaining part of the review (covering Section 4), but that is due now for Sunday on my schedule as well. It will be somehow lengthy again, but almost entirely editorial in nature, nothing fundamental. Fernando has indicated that he will consider all that stuff as WGLC comments, and sum up and report on the outcome to the list soon. I hope that this avoids cluttering the list and will better serve the WG. I had missed the short discussion on this list in August, and now skimming over it, saw some overlap (and similar direction) with my findings. Kind regards, Alfred HÎnes. -- +------------------------+--------------------------------------------+ | TR-Sys Alfred Hoenes | Alfred Hoenes Dipl.-Math., Dipl.-Phys. | | Gerlinger Strasse 12 | Phone: (+49)7156/9635-0, Fax: -18 | | D-71254 Ditzingen | E-Mail: ah@TR-Sys.de | +------------------------+--------------------------------------------+ From A.Hoenes@TR-Sys.de Fri Dec 4 14:41:27 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECE103A6A72 for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 14:41:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.714 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.714 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.463, BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B0IL4bd-vqiG for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 14:41:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from TR-Sys.de (gateway.tr-sys.de [213.178.172.147]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56F563A6A66 for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 14:41:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from ZEUS.TR-Sys.de by w. with ESMTP ($Revision: 1.37.109.26 $/16.3.2) id AA265296417; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 23:40:17 +0100 Received: (from ah@localhost) by z.TR-Sys.de (8.9.3 (PHNE_25183)/8.7.3) id XAA27245; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 23:40:16 +0100 (MEZ) From: Alfred =?hp-roman8?B?SM5uZXM=?= Message-Id: <200912042240.XAA27245@TR-Sys.de> To: opsec@ietf.org Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 23:40:16 +0100 (MEZ) X-Mailer: ELM [$Revision: 1.17.214.3 $] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=hp-roman8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [OPSEC] The plan... / adoption of draft-bhatia-manral-igp-crypto-requirements-04 X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 22:41:28 -0000 At Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:13:49 +0530, Glen Kent wrote: >> ... >> >> draft-bhatia-manral-igp-crypto-requirements-04 - test for inclusion as a >> wg document >> >> Document can be reviewed here: >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhatia-manral-igp-crypto-requirements-04 >> > > I firmly believe that we need such a document and fully support this. > > Glen +1 I had reviewed all three of the "more recent" RFCs referred to in that synoptical draft, and I share the opinion that such synopsis and evaluation document gives very useful guidance. I commit to perform a detailed review of the draft -- but this will certainly take me some time again, perhaps late in January. I'd also like to draw the group's attention to a short individual draft originating from DNSEXT and DNSOP, http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ogud-iana-protocol-maintenance-words-02 that aims at establishing schematic keywords (a la RFC 2119) for use in IANA registry to indicate maintenance/support levels (as seen by the IETF/IESG) of protocol options, in particular cryptographic algorithms. One objective is to establish a more lightweight and uniform method to indicate and maintain implementation requirements. This efforts is somehow related to the above draft and seems to be very useful from an operational perspective, and I'd like to encourage you to review and support this draft; publication already is requested; Russ Housley is shepherding the document (GEN area, lacking a wg, needs a couple of drafts to justify its persistence :-) ) and I expect IETF LC soon. Kind regards, Alfred HÎnes. -- +------------------------+--------------------------------------------+ | TR-Sys Alfred Hoenes | Alfred Hoenes Dipl.-Math., Dipl.-Phys. | | Gerlinger Strasse 12 | Phone: (+49)7156/9635-0, Fax: -18 | | D-71254 Ditzingen | E-Mail: ah@TR-Sys.de | +------------------------+--------------------------------------------+ From joelja@bogus.com Sat Dec 5 00:07:15 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 780803A67B7 for ; Sat, 5 Dec 2009 00:07:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.915 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.915 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.685, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12=1.069, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5SfrZM-M2mpY for ; Sat, 5 Dec 2009 00:07:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49AB93A6774 for ; Sat, 5 Dec 2009 00:07:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.151] (c-98-234-104-156.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [98.234.104.156]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nB5872fB050873 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 5 Dec 2009 08:07:03 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <4B19C002.5070800@bogus.com> Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 18:05:54 -0800 From: Joel Jaeggli User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?QWxmcmVkIO+/vQ==?= References: <200912042240.XAA27245@TR-Sys.de> In-Reply-To: <200912042240.XAA27245@TR-Sys.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Sat, 05 Dec 2009 08:07:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: opsec@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSEC] The plan... / adoption of draft-bhatia-manral-igp-crypto-requirements-04 X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2009 08:07:15 -0000 Thanks, that's an awesome offer of help. Alfred � wrote: > At Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:13:49 +0530, Glen Kent wrote: > >>> ... >>> >>> draft-bhatia-manral-igp-crypto-requirements-04 - test for inclusion as a >>> wg document >>> >>> Document can be reviewed here: >>> >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhatia-manral-igp-crypto-requirements-04 >>> >> I firmly believe that we need such a document and fully support this. >> >> Glen > > +1 > > > I had reviewed all three of the "more recent" RFCs referred to in > that synoptical draft, and I share the opinion that such synopsis > and evaluation document gives very useful guidance. > I commit to perform a detailed review of the draft -- but this will > certainly take me some time again, perhaps late in January. > > > I'd also like to draw the group's attention to a short individual > draft originating from DNSEXT and DNSOP, > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ogud-iana-protocol-maintenance-words-02 > that aims at establishing schematic keywords (a la RFC 2119) for use > in IANA registry to indicate maintenance/support levels (as seen by the > IETF/IESG) of protocol options, in particular cryptographic algorithms. > One objective is to establish a more lightweight and uniform method > to indicate and maintain implementation requirements. > > This efforts is somehow related to the above draft and seems to be > very useful from an operational perspective, and I'd like to encourage > you to review and support this draft; publication already is requested; > Russ Housley is shepherding the document (GEN area, lacking a wg, needs > a couple of drafts to justify its persistence :-) ) and I expect IETF LC > soon. > > > Kind regards, > Alfred H�nes. > From joelja@bogus.com Tue Dec 15 13:20:29 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE563A6AF8 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:20:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.67 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.67 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.310, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MMmB+a1piYvn for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:20:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BDBE3A6AEE for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:20:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.101] (m340536d0.tmodns.net [208.54.5.52]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBFJUp8f017126 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:31:40 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <4B27E3E1.4020102@bogus.com> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:30:41 -0800 From: Joel Jaeggli User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "'opsec@ietf.org'" X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:31:42 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [OPSEC] some thoughts - draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:20:30 -0000 I'm trying to capture a particular problem I think we should make a little more explicit, there's a quote, followed by the comment. page 4 Producing a secure TCP/IP implementation nowadays is a very difficult task, in part because of the lack of a single document that serves as a security roadmap for the protocols. Implementers are faced with the hard task of identifying relevant documentation and differentiate between that which provides correct advisory, and that which provides misleading advisory based on inaccurate or wrong assumptions. The other challenge is that in the case of protocol flaws completely addressing a problem in an implementation may necessarily break compatibility with other implementations which is a consideration in addressing the protocol stack flaws on any kind of comprehensive basis. I doubt that the document requires substantive change in order to capture this. just the addition of some strategic text. joel From joelja@bogus.com Tue Dec 15 13:22:04 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2AE3A6AFC for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:22:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.371 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.371 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.228, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j6MKtB2tb-Xr for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:22:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7E573A6AEE for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:22:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.151] (c-98-234-104-156.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [98.234.104.156]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBF5slps075259 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 05:54:51 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <4B2724A7.6000800@bogus.com> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:54:47 -0800 From: Joel Jaeggli User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "'opsec@ietf.org'" , Joe Abley , Fernando Gont References: <4B161C1D.5020500@bogus.com> In-Reply-To: <4B161C1D.5020500@bogus.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 05:54:52 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [OPSEC] Working Group last call for draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:22:04 -0000 LC ends UTC, Wed DEC 16th 2009. regards joel Joel Jaeggli wrote: > This is the working group Last call for draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security. > > Please review the current draft: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security-01 > > Deadline for Comments is 0000 UTC, Wed DEC 16th 2009. > > As per the minutes the thinking is that this draft will be aimed at > informational status but that we will also solicit feedback via an > ietf-wide last call. > > thanks > joel > > _______________________________________________ > OPSEC mailing list > OPSEC@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec > From manav.bhatia@alcatel-lucent.com Tue Dec 15 18:09:04 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DAAB3A68B0 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:09:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.224 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.224 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.375, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zriNh0i4Hy7r for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:09:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com (ihemail1.lucent.com [135.245.0.33]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF3923A68A0 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:09:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from inbansmailrelay2.in.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-250-11-33.lucent.com [135.250.11.33]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id nBG28k6t010506 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:08:48 -0600 (CST) Received: from INBANSXCHHUB01.in.alcatel-lucent.com (inbansxchhub01.in.alcatel-lucent.com [135.250.12.32]) by inbansmailrelay2.in.alcatel-lucent.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id nBG28j6X018318 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:38:45 +0530 Received: from INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.250.12.56]) by INBANSXCHHUB01.in.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.250.12.32]) with mapi; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:38:45 +0530 From: "Bhatia, Manav (Manav)" To: opsec wg mailing list Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:38:41 +0530 Thread-Topic: Routing Crypto drafts .. Thread-Index: Acp99LAoivFkr+ytTe++5mJSSBojZg== Message-ID: <7C362EEF9C7896468B36C9B79200D8350AB3287303@INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.33 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 135.250.11.33 Subject: [OPSEC] Routing Crypto drafts .. X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 02:09:04 -0000 Hi Joel, What are the next steps for draft-ietf-opsec-routing-protocols-crypto-issue= s-02.txt - "Issues with existing Cryptographic Protection Methods for Routi= ng Protocols"? There is considerable interest in this work. Do you think we= are in a position where we can move this forward? And what about for "Cryptographic Authentication Algorithm Implementation B= est Practices for Routing Protocols" (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhat= ia-manral-igp-crypto-requirements-04)? The language and the tone in the dra= ft has been changed based on the feedback that we received from the WG.=20 Cheers, Manav -- Manav Bhatia, IP Division, Alcatel-Lucent, Bangalore - India = From Donald.Smith@qwest.com Wed Dec 16 08:20:39 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 917DD3A67DB for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:20:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ALL4-l9lce3j for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:20:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from suomp64i.qwest.com (suomp64i.qwest.com [155.70.16.237]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 954CD3A6774 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:20:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from suomp60i.qintra.com (suomp60i.qintra.com [151.117.69.27]) by suomp64i.qwest.com (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id nBGGKGC3021984; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:20:16 -0600 (CST) Received: from qtdenexhtm22.AD.QINTRA.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by suomp60i.qintra.com (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id nBGGK9Db004129; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:20:10 -0600 (CST) Received: from qtdenexmbm24.AD.QINTRA.COM ([151.119.91.226]) by qtdenexhtm22.AD.QINTRA.COM ([151.119.91.231]) with mapi; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:20:09 -0700 From: "Smith, Donald" To: "'Joel Jaeggli'" , "'opsec@ietf.org'" , "'Joe Abley'" , "'Fernando Gont'" Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:20:08 -0700 Thread-Topic: [OPSEC] Working Group last call for draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security Thread-Index: Acp9zKFhZdomQjsjTB6i5WJ4YRWXiQAntrng Message-ID: References: <4B161C1D.5020500@bogus.com> <4B2724A7.6000800@bogus.com> In-Reply-To: <4B2724A7.6000800@bogus.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OPSEC] Working Group last call for draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:20:39 -0000 I submitted some comments directly to Fernando, and resubmitted those yeste= rday. Over all the draft is in pretty good shape but there were a couple of littl= e things and one >=3D that should be > only. (coffee !=3D sleep) & (!coffee =3D=3D sleep) Donald.Smith@qwest.com gcia > -----Original Message----- > From: opsec-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsec-bounces@ietf.org] > On Behalf Of Joel Jaeggli > Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 10:55 PM > To: 'opsec@ietf.org'; Joe Abley; Fernando Gont > Subject: Re: [OPSEC] Working Group last call for > draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security > > LC ends UTC, Wed DEC 16th 2009. > > regards > joel > > Joel Jaeggli wrote: > > This is the working group Last call for > draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security. > > > > Please review the current draft: > > > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security-01 > > > > Deadline for Comments is 0000 UTC, Wed DEC 16th 2009. > > > > As per the minutes the thinking is that this draft will be aimed at > > informational status but that we will also solicit feedback via an > > ietf-wide last call. > > > > thanks > > joel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OPSEC mailing list > > OPSEC@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec > > > _______________________________________________ > OPSEC mailing list > OPSEC@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec > This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the communication and any attachments. From glen.kent@gmail.com Wed Dec 16 15:18:11 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3F7B3A6A9C for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:18:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.979 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.620, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5SFk+pvxf7gV for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:18:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yw0-f185.google.com (mail-yw0-f185.google.com [209.85.211.185]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1F4D3A67AF for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:18:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by ywh15 with SMTP id 15so1610575ywh.5 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:17:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=225mmNCZ3pV746mRae7pHCpiJYGr8wZG96JuQS/l3y4=; b=r1Vhxj3yiL4NEAFXf//riGIdMxsK5pZLeumWAXfQ70YUXhDEzLQwH3D/3WhW95Cdl2 M3bwEjuCu6rLULFIgaFbr5nhRKygqpSjcvnSEXUQgEnKk5hzN3OSWCm/w6BxaoV1qVlh +p8P6eydV9tGU9n4r3UP3hj5luovT3TLXwewc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Wvs9TZnWARtYkRxdGT/9OOuBO6a9joaRziYSrE5UPOT7qNYfQSFxoILjOSRzQHLfnk ZYCHiWw0OaXZPdfcYd9SWPuvzJsoFcnEw51Bw8HZ02cd6X2vWqkCj7FGrg5vnKi1+Mge 3I5CAIBkK3WdlkNPHOn2toUXGBpHF4hYkAVe0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.101.133.39 with SMTP id k39mr2471467ann.190.1261005471293; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:17:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7C362EEF9C7896468B36C9B79200D8350AB3287303@INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <7C362EEF9C7896468B36C9B79200D8350AB3287303@INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 04:47:51 +0530 Message-ID: <92c950310912161517u417d9c94t6ccc7bbf7b38ccb3@mail.gmail.com> From: Glen Kent To: "Bhatia, Manav (Manav)" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: opsec wg mailing list Subject: Re: [OPSEC] Routing Crypto drafts .. X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 23:18:12 -0000 The authors might also want to present this work in KARP WG, if not already done. I am personally ok with both the documents and would like to see them move forward. Glen On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:38 AM, Bhatia, Manav (Manav) wrote: > > Hi Joel, > > What are the next steps for draft-ietf-opsec-routing-protocols-crypto-iss= ues-02.txt - "Issues with existing Cryptographic Protection Methods for Rou= ting Protocols"? There is considerable interest in this work. Do you think = we are in a position where we can move this forward? > > And what about for "Cryptographic Authentication Algorithm Implementation= Best Practices for Routing Protocols" (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bh= atia-manral-igp-crypto-requirements-04)? The language and the tone in the d= raft has been changed based on the feedback that we received from the WG. > > Cheers, Manav > > -- > Manav Bhatia, > IP Division, Alcatel-Lucent, > Bangalore - India > > > _______________________________________________ > OPSEC mailing list > OPSEC@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec > From manav.bhatia@alcatel-lucent.com Wed Dec 16 19:49:46 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DA943A6B17 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:49:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.277 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.322, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NqLeyfbMvogj for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:49:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from ihemail3.lucent.com (ihemail3.lucent.com [135.245.0.37]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 583D23A692A for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:49:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from inbansmailrelay2.in.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-250-11-33.lucent.com [135.250.11.33]) by ihemail3.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id nBH3nR0Y005921 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 16 Dec 2009 21:49:29 -0600 (CST) Received: from INBANSXCHHUB02.in.alcatel-lucent.com (inbansxchhub02.in.alcatel-lucent.com [135.250.12.35]) by inbansmailrelay2.in.alcatel-lucent.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id nBH3nQEH000520 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:19:26 +0530 Received: from INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.250.12.56]) by INBANSXCHHUB02.in.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.250.12.35]) with mapi; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:19:26 +0530 From: "Bhatia, Manav (Manav)" To: Glen Kent Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:19:24 +0530 Thread-Topic: [OPSEC] Routing Crypto drafts .. Thread-Index: Acp+pgRFigLm0hggQyyaedEwoYe+bQAJcOKw Message-ID: <7C362EEF9C7896468B36C9B79200D8350AB32876CE@INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <7C362EEF9C7896468B36C9B79200D8350AB3287303@INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com> <92c950310912161517u417d9c94t6ccc7bbf7b38ccb3@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <92c950310912161517u417d9c94t6ccc7bbf7b38ccb3@mail.gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.37 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 135.250.11.33 Cc: opsec wg mailing list Subject: Re: [OPSEC] Routing Crypto drafts .. X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 03:49:46 -0000 Hi Glen, > The authors might also want to present this work in KARP WG, if not > already done. Yes, this was presented in the KARP BOF the previous IETF. http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/karp-1.pdf >=20 > I am personally ok with both the documents and would like to see them > move forward. Thanks for the support! Cheers, Manav >=20 > Glen >=20 > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:38 AM, Bhatia, Manav (Manav) > wrote: > > > > Hi Joel, > > > > What are the next steps for=20 > draft-ietf-opsec-routing-protocols-crypto-issues-02.txt -=20 > "Issues with existing Cryptographic Protection Methods for=20 > Routing Protocols"? There is considerable interest in this=20 > work. Do you think we are in a position where we can move=20 > this forward? > > > > And what about for "Cryptographic Authentication Algorithm=20 > Implementation Best Practices for Routing Protocols"=20 > (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhatia-manral-igp-crypto-req > uirements-04)? The language and the tone in the draft has=20 > been changed based on the feedback that we received from the WG. > > > > Cheers, Manav > > > > -- > > Manav Bhatia, > > IP Division, Alcatel-Lucent, > > Bangalore - India > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OPSEC mailing list > > OPSEC@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec > > > = From joelja@bogus.com Sun Dec 20 22:07:59 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8A163A687B for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:07:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.683 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.683 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.573, BAYES_05=-1.11] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mLB6Xoo8dWBG for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:07:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D583A683B for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:07:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.151] (c-98-234-104-156.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [98.234.104.156]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBH7Y2I1027960 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 07:34:04 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <4B29DEE9.1090202@bogus.com> Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 23:34:01 -0800 From: Joel Jaeggli User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "'opsec@ietf.org'" X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 07:34:04 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [OPSEC] Working Group last call for draft-ietf-opsec-routing-protocols-crypto-issues-02 X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 06:08:00 -0000 This is the working group Last call for draft-ietf-opsec-routing-protocols-crypto-issues-02 Please review the current draft: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-routing-protocols-crypto-issues-02 Deadline for Comments is 0000 UTC, Thurs Jan 7th 2010. the extended period is to account for the compound set of holidays occuring in a number of locations within the immediate two week period. As per the minutes the thinking is that this draft will be aimed at informational status. thanks joel From joelja@bogus.com Sun Dec 20 22:08:21 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1CCF3A68EC for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:08:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.313 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.313 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.286, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UQn+5VJZ3wav for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:08:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70E143A67B6 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:08:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.151] (c-98-234-104-156.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [98.234.104.156]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBH7QYWp027699 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 07:26:38 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <4B29DD2A.2020709@bogus.com> Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 23:26:34 -0800 From: Joel Jaeggli User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "'opsec@ietf.org'" , Joe Abley , Fernando Gont , Ron Bonica References: <4B161C1D.5020500@bogus.com> <4B2724A7.6000800@bogus.com> In-Reply-To: <4B2724A7.6000800@bogus.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 07:26:39 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [OPSEC] Working Group last call for draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 06:08:21 -0000 Last Call for draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security has been completed without objection. A write-up will be produced and forwarded for consideration by our area directors. If someone is particularly inclined to serve as the document shepherd let me know, otherwise one of the WG chairs will perform that function since neither are listed as authors. Thanks Joel Joel Jaeggli wrote: > LC ends UTC, Wed DEC 16th 2009. > > regards > joel > > Joel Jaeggli wrote: >> This is the working group Last call for draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security. >> >> Please review the current draft: >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security-01 >> >> Deadline for Comments is 0000 UTC, Wed DEC 16th 2009. >> >> As per the minutes the thinking is that this draft will be aimed at >> informational status but that we will also solicit feedback via an >> ietf-wide last call. >> >> thanks >> joel >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OPSEC mailing list >> OPSEC@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec >> > _______________________________________________ > OPSEC mailing list > OPSEC@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec > From joelja@bogus.com Sun Dec 20 22:13:09 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43A1E3A67B6 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:13:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.855 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.855 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.745, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hOSYtpNV-5LT for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:12:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E237D3A659A for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:12:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.11.100] (c-67-189-76-178.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [67.189.76.178]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBL6CVGo015709 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 06:12:33 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <4B2F11CA.5010205@bogus.com> Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:12:26 -0800 From: Joel Jaeggli User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "'opsec@ietf.org'" X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Mon, 21 Dec 2009 06:12:33 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [OPSEC] Apologies... X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 06:13:11 -0000 It appears that mail.ietf.org has not been accepting mail from me over ipv6 for several (at least 4) days. not sure why yet. joel From joelja@bogus.com Sun Dec 20 22:28:21 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E1DB3A6905 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:28:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.227 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.227 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.372, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n9rnCCDfE1hR for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:28:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 444393A6902 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:28:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.11.100] (c-67-189-76-178.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [67.189.76.178]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBL67tkU015421 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 06:07:57 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <4B2F10B5.4060004@bogus.com> Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:07:49 -0800 From: Joel Jaeggli User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "'opsec@ietf.org'" X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Mon, 21 Dec 2009 06:07:57 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [OPSEC] test, please ignore. X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 06:28:21 -0000 testing. From joelja@bogus.com Wed Dec 30 21:19:52 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8EAA3A699E for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:19:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.113 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.113 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.114, BAYES_50=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o8JAU5NxayHx for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:19:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5AF23A698C for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:19:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.11.104] (c-67-189-76-178.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [67.189.76.178]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBV5JT1b095545 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:19:30 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <4B3C345B.6050707@bogus.com> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:19:23 -0800 From: Joel Jaeggli User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "'opsec@ietf.org'" X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:19:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [OPSEC] IETF 77 timeline X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: opsec wg mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 05:19:52 -0000 Most relevant timeline milestones in preparation for IETF 77 are below. Thanks joel --- 2009-12-21 (Week of): IETF Online Registration opens. 2009-12-21 (Monday): Working Group and BOF scheduling begins. To request a Working Group session, use the IETF Meeting Session Request Tool. 2010-02-08 (Monday): Cutoff date for requests to schedule Working Group meetings at 17:00 PST (01:00 Tuesday, February 9 UTC). To request a Working Group session, use the IETF Meeting Session Request Tool. 2010-02-17 (Wednesday): Preliminary agenda published for comment. 2010-02-22 (Monday): Cutoff date for requests to reschedule Working Group and BOF meetings 17:00 PST (01:00 Tuesday, February 23 UTC). 2010-02-22 (Monday): Working Group Chair approval for initial document (Version -00) submissions appreciated by 17:00 PST (01:00 Tuesday, February 23 UTC). 2010-02-26 (Friday): Final agenda to be published. 2010-03-01 (Monday): Internet Draft Cut-off for initial document (-00) submission by 17:00 PST (01:00 Tuesday, March 2 UTC), upload using IETF ID Submission Tool. 2010-03-08 (Monday): Internet Draft final submission cut-off by 17:00 PST (01:00 Tuesday, March 9 UTC), upload using IETF ID Submission Tool. 2010-03-10 (Wednesday): Draft Working Group agendas due by 17:00 PST (01:00 Thursday, March 11 UTC), upload using IETF Meeting Materials Management Tool. 2010-03-12 (Friday): Early Bird registration and payment cut-off at 17:00 PST (01:00 Saturday, March 13 UTC). 2010-03-15 (Monday): Revised Working Group agendas due by 17:00 PDT (24:00 UTC), upload using IETF Meeting Materials Management Tool. 2010-03-15 (Monday): Registration cancellation cut-off at 17:00 PDT (24:00 UTC). 2010-03-19 (Friday): Final Pre-Registration and Pre-Payment cut-off at 17:00 PDT (24:00 UTC). 2010-03-21 - 2010-03-26: 77th IETF Meeting in Anaheim, California, USA.