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

John C Klensin <john@jck.com> Tue, 25 October 2011 19:48 UTC

Return-Path: <john@jck.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 C7E381F0C49 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 12:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, 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 VjAKW2KFyFUo for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 12:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F4FF1F0C46 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 12:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1RImyq-000BAM-PC; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 15:48:12 -0400
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 15:48:12 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john@jck.com>
To: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>, Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>
Message-ID: <17E2CBDBC869661E838F3B79@PST.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <01O7MPSWCQIQ00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>
References: <20111018191615.13760.71231.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CADBvc98iHh4Nk4S0ipkSs3ATKTVBM_qALM9gGApj5gaW27t4nQ@mail.gmail.com> <01O7EEVR67JU00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C14B3F@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <4EA6E9E2.2080308@qualcomm.com> <01O7MPSWCQIQ00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
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: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 19:48:16 -0000

--On Tuesday, October 25, 2011 10:08 -0700 Ned Freed
<ned.freed@mrochek.com> wrote:

>> The IESG is of the opinion that this should go for the new
>> "Internet Standard" designation. That means running a new,
>> 4-week, last call. I will initiate that tomorrow unless I
>> hear yelps of horror from the WG.
> 
> Go for it!
> 
> There are a fair number of documents I think we'll be able to
> progress given
> only two maturity levels. But given this is a new process, it
> would be much
> better if the first document was one that was being processed
> for another,
> preferably minor, reason. This document seems like the perfect
> candidate.

+1