[Asdf] John Scudder's Block on charter-ietf-asdf-01-00: (with BLOCK)

John Scudder via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 04 April 2024 13:35 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: John Scudder via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: asdf-chairs@ietf.org, asdf@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>
Message-ID: <171223772177.50539.6217829290982746548@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2024 06:35:21 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/asdf/OaW3YKFRKFS2S864IPeIVgxnfT8>
Subject: [Asdf] John Scudder's Block on charter-ietf-asdf-01-00: (with BLOCK)

John Scudder has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-asdf-01-00: Block

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)



The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-asdf/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
BLOCK:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Related to Roman’s block position, I’m concerned about the exact phrasing of
“The ASDF WG will develop these extensions by working with experts from”.
Specifically, it’s the preposition “by” it gives me pause. It implies, to me at
least, that the IETF is ceding its agency to the listed SDOs/comsortia.

Changing “by working with” to “in consultation with” or even just removing “by”
would address my concern.

[Asdf] John Scudder's Block on charter-ietf-asdf-… John Scudder via Datatracker
Re: [Asdf] John Scudder's Block on charter-ietf-a… Eliot Lear
Re: [Asdf] John Scudder's Block on charter-ietf-a… John Scudder
Re: [Asdf] John Scudder's Block on charter-ietf-a… Michael Richardson