IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Multipart/report, draft-kucherawy-rfc3462bis-01.txt

Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net> Thu, 28 July 2011 18:22 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 92B2411E8078 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:22:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZwLwGUjYhlMH for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:22:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6382C11E80F0 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:22:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [130.129.85.251] (dhcp-55fb.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.85.251]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p6SIMndE014316 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:22:56 -0700
Message-ID: <4E31A8F6.6060304@dcrocker.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:22:46 -0400
From: Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
References: <20110727052622.18893.75906.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4E3013C8.7060203@tana.it> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F13512DF461@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <01O45CD1RC5O00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F13512DF48D@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F13512DF493@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <01O46FWTC6N600VHKR@mauve.mrochek.com>
In-Reply-To: <01O46FWTC6N600VHKR@mauve.mrochek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:22:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Multipart/report, draft-kucherawy-rfc3462bis-01.txt
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
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: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 18:22:59 -0000

On 7/28/2011 2:10 PM, Ned Freed wrote:
>> ...and RFC3464 is showing updated by two other documents.  I imagine we'd
>> have to sort out how to resolve all of that, so maybe this is a more
>> heavyweight change than I'd hoped.
>
> I have to ask: So what? So let's say we have to do a 3462bis that resets
> things to proposed.
>
> Why is this a big deal? We do it, six months later we advance the
> specification back to draft - this should be easy since we only need
> to review the consequences, if any, of the change we're making.


The transaction cost of having an additional process through the IETF/IESG is 
never trivial.

I know you know this; I don't know why you think it's a small deal.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email