IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3462bis: PS or DS?

Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com> Fri, 02 September 2011 22:33 UTC

Return-Path: <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.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 4369E21F8DFD for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Sep 2011 15:33:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.039
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.039 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, 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 H96ppHKOgwjN for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Sep 2011 15:33:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gw0-f44.google.com (mail-gw0-f44.google.com [74.125.83.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B040421F8DFC for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Sep 2011 15:33:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gwb20 with SMTP id 20so2431894gwb.31 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 02 Sep 2011 15:35:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=LWI/Iv1aGk4mcaaDBNBC+eSTDGa8fgNJCd3FM9hHDBU=; b=WcfCrfcfHbTtWKuIPv4mAj6pIaeqda8ASSX+yVg0KObO6FJ5A239zv6ck6HNYAnDCh Cd5eGlqnfeBGM00L1XWpGjjWnOxaYNxgflaAID5kv7IHlj4ciOsQQVW7ujfEnjT0gaR9 c/cw+eLW7F6zf+BHKETAi8VREXOIams2/yi4E=
Received: by 10.68.34.34 with SMTP id w2mr2774419pbi.291.1315002908088; Fri, 02 Sep 2011 15:35:08 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.98.5 with HTTP; Fri, 2 Sep 2011 15:34:27 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVBfyO4qDKEQp+0tsiN65oyUAvAdFs1-y5v3r1q7o+Ve4w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110830041853.24036.37.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F13512DFA7F@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <CAC4RtVBfyO4qDKEQp+0tsiN65oyUAvAdFs1-y5v3r1q7o+Ve4w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2011 00:34:27 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHhFybq=YWpaxpUVacZ-4UZASwJ_DFZrFqxAQHw_Fon+Tn2xeg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc3462bis: PS or DS?
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: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 22:33:32 -0000

On 2 September 2011 22:36, Barry Leiba wrote:

> The decision about the ultimate status of the document will be
> made by the IESG, but input from the working group is important.

The draft should be in a form allowing them to pick STD.  IMO the
decision can be only PS (incompatible change) or STD (some minor
resctriction removed).  What would be a plausible reason for DS ?

-Frank

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email