IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Cellar] ffv1 missref status

Steve Lhomme <slhomme@matroska.org> Sun, 14 March 2021 07:49 UTC

Return-Path: <slhomme@matroska.org>
X-Original-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C4CE3A1EB5 for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 23:49:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=matroska-org.20150623.gappssmtp.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 dWEidrjQrFX6 for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 23:49:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com (mail-wm1-x336.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::336]) (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 44D3B3A1EB3 for <cellar@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 23:49:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id g25so6212292wmh.0 for <cellar@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 23:49:34 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=matroska-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PXyIgdvWOvSZD+5uQvzEACvyKHMLo1DWFcJS5qMs/zs=; b=ovZMC4SF/6aAA9BxY2z0ESiBcPgZwI9Ab2mKq+5mD9xdD2FpC1WxZlU/spd72ygDU7 +ZPCv9MSG/rTjj6ky6MzYqgpO8enRBdl9n97L0Hj1ABdVl2je4KNE9rw0CciK5/rsbJj Xq2BWm4EZl6TYCJgCZA6BwzTsSD43eRCjBl7IYPwaSDx/hGRXa9721OypWG8oAa7Ld7Z if3W0/PIT9nMuGbDXpoJyozDzIEV0v0lHjHka7s0e30lBCb1aECL0lsoCE24yiW0mxtq m7+JcCv+nED89EHAqzd/IZVOKzgCaXiGFj70Ewqi3pYIDPYHUXVb+ajx6TUi/dwwYM5i w++Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=PXyIgdvWOvSZD+5uQvzEACvyKHMLo1DWFcJS5qMs/zs=; b=ro/+eyqOIgNI/j22Yaf2vxg9ptnOFCsxDPt7jxhP1u+UynO/FPHr8nAUVsCCwHWVUo 63b+Ksb1XlDZvMkBWv2iMCe5g/PHLEWbXQuERX+QwcLP4jmnKso9fLPBFSzWlrNY/Zp/ L/4J694LOPQ0DbKN/skRKAHXF2PaQB3YvWU8hWJCYd5L5Y7KkBPPLUPw09s1+RhkHaMh 6eT2ek6UQ9Pe30SWczwKOO1KWIxFEjm1vjS0K8jERAFDbtJBB2Xa2zOQkTJhi9Y8J6Zu XCn91eKKB3p3GOoTrlwYrhAFw6OTwqF6AdEg2cQ2UhawwOUHJJ8OKPufiGgaQvCuWk5Z 03vg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ONz+Uzvdicj/cy4YTXbjKTwcRbY7vDVV6RMB+0xGP3KLvDZnz UB1z6CK1/PP/KHBW7uISjAhZKjwySLd2EEdV
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwEsUwttXYZaZMeumsKeiP8bx/J6j+cQQDAsR3mZjvxKuMdqH1IqP12I8UJkZxEunu6DuwXHQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:3d46:: with SMTP id k67mr15664963wma.188.1615708171004; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 23:49:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2a01:cb0c:20:e900:6400:b15e:c739:75d1? (2a01cb0c0020e9006400b15ec73975d1.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr. [2a01:cb0c:20:e900:6400:b15e:c739:75d1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h8sm4351630wrt.94.2021.03.13.23.49.30 for <cellar@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 13 Mar 2021 23:49:30 -0800 (PST)
To: cellar@ietf.org
References: <D113AC36-610D-49B5-BCEE-6FF497C4014F@dericed.com> <1478779.1615583715@dooku> <C6650544-18A3-4AD3-9B8D-C66A65304FEF@dericed.com>
From: Steve Lhomme <slhomme@matroska.org>
Message-ID: <8f329b40-fbfc-f0ae-0523-2e1079522477@matroska.org>
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2021 08:49:30 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <C6650544-18A3-4AD3-9B8D-C66A65304FEF@dericed.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cellar/H3XclUUb46h97_qiLeUK636sA58>
Subject: Re: [Cellar] ffv1 missref status
X-BeenThere: cellar@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec Encoding for LossLess Archiving and Realtime transmission <cellar.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cellar/>
List-Post: <mailto:cellar@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2021 07:49:37 -0000

On 2021-03-12 22:34, Dave Rice wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> 
>> On Mar 12, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dave Rice <dave@dericed.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Michael, Spencer, I see that FFV1 is in “RFC Ed Queue” status with
>>> with “MISSREF for 8 days” which IIUC means that the RFC editor is
>>> awaiting a missing normative reference.
>>
>> Yeah.  I think we (chairs) screwed up here.
>>
>> It seems that ffv1 has a normative reference to Matroska:
>>
>> 9.  Normative References
>>
>>    [ISO.15444-1.2016]
>>               International Organization for Standardization,
>>               "Information technology -- JPEG 2000 image coding system:
>>               Core coding system", October 2016.
>>
>>    [ISO.9899.2018]
>>               International Organization for Standardization,
>>               "Programming languages - C", ISO Standard 9899, 2018.
>>
>>    [Matroska] IETF, "Matroska", 2019, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/
>>               draft-ietf-cellar-matroska/>.
>>
>>
>> So we aren't allowed to normatively reference Internet Drafts.
>> It is referenced in section 4.3.3.4 only only.
>> I don't think it needs to be a normative reference.
>>
>> Our choices are:
>>   1) leave things as they are, and finish Matroska faster.  FFV1 will
>>      wait for us in the Q.
>>
>>   2) ask our AD to approve us changing this reference to informative.
>>
>> My reading is that I don't think it needs to be normative.
> 
> I agree. Option 2 please. If there’s rough consensus on that, I can submit a patch, but let me know if you would advise a new version.

I agree with that as well.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email