Subject: [Diffserv] Re: Informal WG last call for draft-ietf-diffserv-tunnels-01.txt

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:59:22 -0500

Hi,

This informal WG last call is now over. The only issue pending
is one raised by Michael Richardson:

    >> There is no cryptographic advantage to using one tunnel since traffic
    >> analysis is now possible thanks to the differing markings, so using 
    >> multiple tunnels should be the recommended approach, unless this causes
    >> one to run out of crypto-contexts in some piece of hardware.

David, please agree with Michael during this week whether a text update
is needed, and if so get it in before the cutoff. The co-chairs will then
forward this to the IESG.

Thanks

   Brian

Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> 
> It is intended to submit draft-ietf-diffserv-tunnels-01.txt
> as an Informational RFC. There is no formal requirement for
> a WG Last Call, but if you have any further substantive comments
> on the document please raise them on this list within ten days,
> i.e. by July 10 at the latest.
> 
> If you have typographical/editorial comments please send them
> direct to the document's author, David Black.
> 
>    Brian + Kathie
>    diffserv co-chairs

_______________________________________________
diffserv mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv
Archive: http://www-nrg.ee.lbl.gov/diff-serv-arch/