Re: [babel] Routing area directorate early (QA) review of draft-ietf-babel-applicability

Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Mon, 06 February 2017 03:08 UTC

Return-Path: <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C55BF129AAC; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 19:08:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.45
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.45 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 5SeXYWW_SKYD; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 19:08:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-it0-x22f.google.com (mail-it0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22f]) (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 BB26F129AA6; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 19:08:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-it0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id c7so46762246itd.1; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 19:08:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=H6+ophC12aKu8wKpuy96nHO5ZU7zDZ7GzC9zC8FVvc4=; b=RST6rV8HnDsTAgaSeByEFSOgTosob+11MrrghYOjW828IoD0OASmhnkQzmpjk8JoFW iseBvgqR1cxcWiO2OPTdJb+hI344RrkHtN1GcioDH8he5DaaBUCKm9Mvp564UM4RSEVm k5lbS0quBgXkBVopsyx0rw0U9Dp6PtGuqv2t3zQfT9LIlIiPWOUSgX+WB+4hRXDVKBA2 3HdkcXlUOaTGNqM/eVX/HoUvzCVe0Wtk3UBb/xNmY2BhUv3IA78JKBrK6u9AiTsq35sV 1+TAUuxn3isGOLyAGudaAFqWz2i21z5IsWqXyqZ6AN+E9koeAQuHafTJmCA2/4+vTZ+V CHzQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=H6+ophC12aKu8wKpuy96nHO5ZU7zDZ7GzC9zC8FVvc4=; b=oV9ZsNZDC3sRh4SVBTndJ0hk5muOthh59hmy1yUxMW+5sH2woREnkK4OyM93jIbHFX VBnP9GO92z984QY8S7w6LrykTkLS9z19Pp2g0sHuV+Q/3Gp5tog5cVMHVfWTfwfatTcH eJ+V1D6i6QbjpOctuAAcmXX1sjyKlZ8LQnOSSreNNPc14BqlaZxcr97iUMbRPBanepp5 EdNliBicYWQfsg3cGIcjd/fVzbnFnKJhFpx34eD1T7c0l4ZbPlGmzhiMcJZJnjvFq3Ck XcdCO3rXAcAWwRlFGZKHe1n2H1QkIi4FQ8GEU9/qkR7fyiQ5apH8GSuKkMMkxZz3H8OD 3AXw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXLhY4P4D8CV+ytEOUDgXIoe34C63ei/tFDDSTKSGT+zdeFww1weQcEbrpaCVQ85+va5Ax55ApPoTvaupg==
X-Received: by 10.36.47.213 with SMTP id j204mr5517808itj.7.1486350530015; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 19:08:50 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.41.72 with HTTP; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 19:08:34 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <87mve07dyi.wl-jch@irif.fr>
References: <BY2PR0201MB1910F03312F1A6360AB6790884640@BY2PR0201MB1910.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <HE1PR0301MB22668B182167E8D7CD1F4E4A9D4A0@HE1PR0301MB2266.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <87mve07dyi.wl-jch@irif.fr>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2017 22:08:34 -0500
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEGVcFzCYz-ciuW=7FazONB2DJXSwOB+qtm=rGONje0HbA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/z0MfhQ2ix15zEeXUPTitAbxEeU0>
Cc: "<rtg-ads@ietf.org> (rtg-ads@ietf.org)" <rtg-ads@ietf.org>, Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>, "babel@ietf.org" <babel@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [babel] Routing area directorate early (QA) review of draft-ietf-babel-applicability
X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." <babel.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/babel/>
List-Post: <mailto:babel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 03:08:51 -0000

Hi Juliusz,

On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> wrote:
> Dear Alexander, dear all,
>
> I've read your review carefully, and you have convinced me that this
> document is not ready for publication as an informational RFC.  I think
> you make three very good points:
>
>   (1) the introduction is lacking;
>   (2) the deployments should, whenever possible, be described in more detail;
>   (3) the usage of extensions should be stressed whenever applicable.
>
> This is very useful feedback, for which I am grateful.
>
> Donald -- do I need to do something in order to interrupt the last call?

No... Generally speaking, you can accumulate recommended changes
during the Last Call and issue a revised version.  If there is some
controversy about recommended changes (which there wasn't in this case
as the only response was your posting that you think the suggestions
are pretty reasonable), the chairs might have to make a consensus call
as to whether or not to make a particular change.

There was good support when this draft was adopted and it is called
for in the Charter but there haven't been any specific Last Call
comments on this version so far. Please go ahead and update the draft
based on these agreed Routing Directorate QA review comments and post
a revision and I'll post an extension of the WG Last Call.

Thanks,
Donald

PS: I'm in Sydney, Australia, this week for the Wi-Fi Alliance meeting.
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com

> Thanks to all for your help,
>
> -- Juliusz