Re: Comments on draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-11

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Comments on draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-11
From: Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 02 May 2017 12:04:13 +0900
Cc: IESG <iesg@xxxxxxxx>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <C49A16E7-1680-4FC9-A423-15A32EFF3D8F@mnot.net>
References: <C49A16E7-1680-4FC9-A423-15A32EFF3D8F@mnot.net>
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.5 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)

> For example, Section 2.2 talks about the importance of passive
> monitoring for traffic surveys, but fails to discuss alternative means

possibly our friends from zürich have some ideas here

randy

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Comments on draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-11
  - From: IETF

References:
- Comments on draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-11
  - From: Mark Nottingham

Prev by Date: Artart telechat review of draft-ietf-anima-grasp-11
Next by Date: RE: [netmod] Last Call: <draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification-06.txt> (YANG Module Classification) to Informational RFC
Previous by thread: Re: Comments on draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-11
Next by thread: Re: Comments on draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-11
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [IETF Annoucements] [IETF] [IP Storage] [Yosemite News] [Linux SCTP] [Linux Newbies] [Fedora Users]