Diameter Network Access Server Application
draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bis-14

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 14 and is now closed.

(Benoît Claise; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ()
No email
send info

(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) Yes

Yes (2013-12-18)
No email
send info
- Thank you for section 8.2! (hence the yes:-)

- As a side-comment, and not related to this draft at all, we
should think about whether it'd be worth a look at the TLS
ciphersuites mentioned in 6733 again, now that PFS
ciphersuites are generally being more favoured. If say,
Diameter/TLS were only starting to be deployed now, it might
be worthwhile thinking about key exfiltration attacks and the
impact of those, in the same way that the UTA WG are doing
for other protocols. That could be done with a small RFC that
updated 6733 and basically copied a new set of preferred PFS
ciphersuites from one of the UTA documents, once those have
firmed up a bit.

(Adrian Farrel; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Barry Leiba; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Brian Haberman; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Joel Jaeggli; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Martin Stiemerling; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Sean Turner; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Spencer Dawkins; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Stewart Bryant; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info