Re: [Captive-portals] AD review of draft-ietf-capport-architecture-07

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Mon, 11 May 2020 16:38 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF6BD3A0994 for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 May 2020 09:38:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 CWt6ureJeGUa for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 May 2020 09:38:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-f182.google.com (mail-il1-f182.google.com [209.85.166.182]) (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 079DF3A0A13 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 May 2020 09:38:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-f182.google.com with SMTP id w6so9211133ilg.1 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 May 2020 09:38:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4JZrQpZB/qnVXMdU2vo4jcwTPauzs//ldXX/gK5F6Hk=; b=eeVXio2W1vfUe0ysl54LplWA/o4AE6+S1dPNGDKenyK3RzGtNzzJPjO1++Fn1ssqxj 7/fMqrSoWMNu6kGqBSXFmUcA433V/gEsTFGIbXTmY20EglpRzjXjlGFrC7zeQth0vOOr BCAJCQuTTS7ekJEP90aRNfFLq4YjvVTUHf09m7Q+KXt4MD5fdrwU4EQ9KlvnPWz/azEV Qd4V64yJu0NFDk7de0FiALJmosXZUk2uRE2rwAqS/lcI4S4Pt3ouyWMthxdKjgZGt6OQ T49vUnnWuOXXiAwiB+6mMoePBVUQFF165Is0w21je8MzmKD0gFxaIHExCQ42T2UBm1ia Qxjg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PubkZ2Coh7MmZxUKzRX0OpNUAYbum5GTHjlEXwmZ0k4Gn1RBnAil veJGgBVTb7oAFCgmieKRZOP3rdlpokuzYmANeHY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIayD/j/GgrWtvpI2zujYfJIQtL8faXybQZvM0HvDxGGZDbNS2tVai/DpJ+qi6wufa5aCnxEVrfCfUC37xdINU=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:106d:: with SMTP id q13mr13324243ilj.107.1589215094945; Mon, 11 May 2020 09:38:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CALaySJ+K1FZu5POa=TLz2-ON8=jvyE03gqdi+5+cNj8X4E9RoA@mail.gmail.com> <a4a3747ef330d8b2ac94a178ab691ca8@golden.net> <CALaySJLxqtqGAytEK3X083zg3hyXSOQ6FdnaTz5t1tDNS8tKeA@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJJ5Z2QpnVQ19ax+ChVNLSYk0yKhpk7uX4P5NiU-xcwJuA@mail.gmail.com> <14353.1589213763@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <14353.1589213763@localhost>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 12:38:03 -0400
Message-ID: <CALaySJJLfueapVTY4qOeoQc9s5aOK6mVWLi9VjOJwdHMFcHPjA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
Cc: ddolson@acm.org, captive-portals@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/Wx0fj1IEAfkp9C1YmKcSeLwCm60>
Subject: Re: [Captive-portals] AD review of draft-ietf-capport-architecture-07
X-BeenThere: captive-portals@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of issues related to captive portals <captive-portals.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/captive-portals>, <mailto:captive-portals-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/captive-portals/>
List-Post: <mailto:captive-portals@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:captive-portals-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals>, <mailto:captive-portals-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 16:38:35 -0000

Yes, that's the plan.

Barry

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 12:16 PM Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> wrote:
>
> Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
>     > Martin, should I hold the telechat scheduling of the other two
>     > documents to make sure that architecture is on the same telechat as
>     > they are, so the IESG is reviewing them all together?  I think that's
>     > best, but can be convinced not to have the others wait.
>
> So you want to have:
> 1) API
> 2) architecture
> 3) rfc7710bis
>
> all on the 2020-05-21 telechat?
> That would be awesome!
>
> --
> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
> ]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [
>