Re: [alto] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-09: (with DISCUSS)

"Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Thu, 06 December 2018 13:53 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: alto@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75BD1124D68; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 05:53:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g7QguzVZrCMZ; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 05:53:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54447124C04; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 05:53:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [2001:67c:10ec:5785:8000::430] (helo=ict-networks-2001-067c-10ec-5785-8000-0000-0000-0430.fwd-v6.ethz.ch); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1gUu5v-0001Iz-4X; Thu, 06 Dec 2018 14:53:35 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: "Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <154404682585.31877.15741071890095313862.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2018 14:53:32 +0100
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Vijay Gurbani <vijay.gurbani@nokia.com>, draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar@ietf.org, alto@ietf.org, alto-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F8F1800D-30B0-441A-A98F-0F049B3B98E6@kuehlewind.net>
References: <154404682585.31877.15741071890095313862.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1544104419;5e4cd28f;
X-HE-SMSGID: 1gUu5v-0001Iz-4X
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/TdIIp135WR6qtl8cdYrKQF3CdrI>
Subject: Re: [alto] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-09: (with DISCUSS)
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization \(alto\) WG mailing list" <alto.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/alto>, <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/alto/>
List-Post: <mailto:alto@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto>, <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2018 13:53:42 -0000

Hi Alvaro,

thanks for detecting this. I wasn’t aware of this!

I will check with authors and chairs, however it could also be the cause that the IPR was not applicable to the wg doc anymore, as there have been quite some changes to the -01 version of the draft (when the IPR was filed) and the adopted version.

If that is not the case, we will re-issue wg and IETF last call and bring it back.

Mirja



> Am 05.12.2018 um 22:53 schrieb Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>:
> 
> Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-09: Discuss
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> This is a process DISCUSS.
> 
> This document replaces draft-randriamasy-alto-cost-calendar, but this
> information is not reflected in the datatracker.  The individual draft has an
> IPR declaration attached to it [1], but the failure to link the two documents
> has resulted in the IPR indication not carrying over.   The direct effect is
> that the IETF Last Call [2] explicitly says that "No IPR declarations have been
> submitted directly on this I-D."
> 
> The Shepherd writeup says that "The entire author team has confirmed
> conformance with BCP 78/79 with the shephered." -- but that doesn't indicate
> whether IPR is present or not, just conformance.  In looking through the
> mailing list archive, I couldn't find mention of the IPR at adoption [3] [4] or
> at WGLC [5].
> 
> The declaration was made early in the process [6], and there was no discussion
> in the WG about it.  I can see how it would be easy to overlook.
> 
> Nonetheless, it is necessary for the WG (and the IETF as a whole) to explicitly
> consider the declaration before proceeding with the publication of this
> document.
> 
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2392/
> [2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/LI01TfoTCnJRDImEUXA-9x8KsZ4
> [3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/xFErWArHhpF-0ZVR_1BAhgzRj3k
> [4] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/-D7cj6qoD-Q3ye3rpuj8li2xWms
> [5] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/67W_XuMfu7JMXQEEZFLkulw_xBI
> [6]
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipr-announce/lnZ65z15_Dn3bylJp7h9rGHxZFk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> alto mailing list
> alto@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto