[ntpwg] Autokey

[Danny Mayer]

Dave,

My understanding of this was that the editors and/or chairs felt it
would be too difficult, given the security questions, to get it through
on standards track. I too would prefer standards track.

I haven't heard of another implementation of autokey. Pray tell us more
as this could give an impetus to this document.

Danny

David Mills wrote:
> Danny,
> 
> I have had several jousts with the IESG reviewers, one of which asked me 
> why the document was not on the standards track, especially since all 
> but one reference to the reference implementation was removed by 
> request. I told them my personal preference was that it be on the 
> standards track, especially since there apparently is now another 
> implementation. The opinion of the WG as a group might be different, in 
> which case the IESG should be so advised.
> 
> Dave
> 
> Danny Mayer wrote:
> 
>> Todd Glassey wrote:
>>  
>>
>>> Danny Mayer wrote:
>>>    
>>>
>>>> Todd Glassey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>      
>>>>
>>>>> In regard to this I-D, its according to the filing obsoletes the
>>>>> RFC1305 document which doesnt seem possible since it is not a RFC,
>>>>> and thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Todd
>>>>>    
>>>>>        
>>>>>
>>>> Obsoleting an RFC can only happen when the draft becomes an RFC. When
>>>> issuing a draft you need to state any RFC that will be obsoleted by the
>>>> adoption of the draft. That has nothing to do with Dave, it's standard
>>>> IETF process.
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>      
>>>>
>>> Danny my concern was that this document is filed for informational
>>> purposes and I am getting underwriting for NTP and the bonding house
>>> wants that in place.  So I want to make sure NTPv4 RFC happens as soon
>>> as possible since its already in use.
>>> Todd
>>>    
>>>
>> The draft is informational so the bonding house will probably be
>> disappointed that it's not a proposed standard. That of course has
>> nothing to do with the NTPv4 draft RFC.
>>
>> Danny
>>
>>  
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ntpwg mailing list
> ntpwg at lists.ntp.org
> https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/ntpwg
> 
> 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.