Authentication and Confidentiality in Protocol Independent Multicast Sparse Mode (PIM-SM) Link-Local Messages
draft-ietf-pim-sm-linklocal-10
Yes
(Adrian Farrel)
No Objection
(Cullen Jennings)
(Dan Romascanu)
(Jari Arkko)
(Lisa Dusseault)
(Magnus Westerlund)
(Ralph Droms)
(Robert Sparks)
(Ron Bonica)
(Ross Callon)
(Russ Housley)
(Tim Polk)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 10 and is now closed.
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Alexey Melnikov Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2009-11-28)
Unknown
4. Authentication Implementations conforming to this specification MUST support authentication for PIM-SM link-local messages. Implementations conforming to this specification MUST support HMAC-SHA1. A reference to the document that defines authentication using HMAC-SHA1 would be very helpful here. And BTW, did you mean HMAC-SHA1-96 mentioned in RFC 4835? 5. Confidentiality Implementations conforming to this specification SHOULD support confidentiality for PIM-SM. Implementations supporting confidentiality MUST support AES-CBC with a 128-bit key. As above.
Cullen Jennings Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Lisa Dusseault Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ralph Droms Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Robert Sparks Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ross Callon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Russ Housley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Tim Polk Former IESG member
(was No Record, Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown