Re: [art] BCP190

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Tue, 23 July 2019 20:14 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 601FF120352 for <art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 13:14:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.68
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.68 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.com
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 hA4O3la72n4n for <art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 13:14:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 8F7D712036D for <art@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Jul 2019 13:14:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Orochi.local ([196.52.21.201]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x6NKDodv036125 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 23 Jul 2019 15:13:52 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1563912834; bh=aW4lNA0n45BpspRb9+Tk+lGcZYLbr07I69RU7ItyLQs=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=jns8rEKDzbArQMpK+jzly/0j6/RdeAj/aO59QlLEscfa2c+9jeiO7azjZSJSBxLG7 ZcFuXwdLQMXee7mQMmJ3GScfdzJPk2DxhgwFliA1M3ljzotLfYis3NUd4eSIUsGhLj wCrZodS1BBpQD69WxLwfg+xxoxakCQAx7NjVcaag=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host [196.52.21.201] claimed to be Orochi.local
To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, 'Stephen Farrell' <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, 'Carsten Bormann' <cabo@tzi.org>
Cc: art@ietf.org
References: <422255D5-FD8A-48D8-8442-1A13E3E7B884@tzi.org> <8872cc5c-34c5-845c-c930-3a7f0e3501f2@nostrum.com> <E1B1F492-6DD7-4FAD-AFE0-BD19E0197892@tzi.org> <d79add04-9562-83a8-9e4e-fc44fff276e1@nostrum.com> <52b99182-686d-4c12-9a3a-24dc8d696c73@cs.tcd.ie> <ef8e04ac-a085-633d-e680-2cf7e1c47efd@nostrum.com> <01c701d5418f$85e90f70$91bb2e50$@acm.org>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <5d6deecc-c422-d2ed-52bf-5286796a3421@nostrum.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 16:13:50 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <01c701d5418f$85e90f70$91bb2e50$@acm.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/art/deF9maMtBUGh2euzs4M3nPHAmII>
Subject: Re: [art] BCP190
X-BeenThere: art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Applications and Real-Time Area Discussion <art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/art>, <mailto:art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/art/>
List-Post: <mailto:art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/art>, <mailto:art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 20:14:09 -0000

On 7/23/19 15:47, Larry Masinter wrote:
> I'm not sure it's BCP 190 that is too strict, but the IESG's DISCUSSes are
> too strict in their interpretation of it and the wisdom of treating
> non-conformity with a BCP as somehow being disallowed in an
> Experimental status specification.


The TRANS working group is chartered to eventually progress this 
specification from Experimental to Standards Track. What do you believe 
happens at that point?

/a