IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3462bis-02.txt

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com> Wed, 19 October 2011 18:39 UTC

Return-Path: <msk@cloudmark.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6998311E80AA for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.689
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.689 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.090, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q4YobA0P18MH for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ht2-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht2-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1767511E808A for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by spite.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.72]) with mapi; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:39:43 -0700
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
To: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:39:42 -0700
Thread-Topic: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3462bis-02.txt
Thread-Index: AcyOjim1Zo5Rt8+XRIyLEhW3i1RDEAAADG2g
Message-ID: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C14B3F@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
References: <20111018191615.13760.71231.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CADBvc98iHh4Nk4S0ipkSs3ATKTVBM_qALM9gGApj5gaW27t4nQ@mail.gmail.com> <01O7EEVR67JU00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>
In-Reply-To: <01O7EEVR67JU00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3462bis-02.txt
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:39:44 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ned Freed
> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 11:32 AM
> To: Mykyta Yevstifeyev
> Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3462bis-02.txt
> 
> > Are you going to incorporate my feedback
> > (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg69885.html)?
> 
> Speaking only for myself, I didn't find any of these suggested changes to be at
> all compelling. In particular, I find the FOO [FOO] thing more troublesome than
> helpful. I also don't care in the slightest about matching some sort of New
> Abstract style. And finally, the applicability of the two maturity level stuff
> to this effort is for the IESG to sort out.

Concur on all points.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email