IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [core] Should we bury draft-ietf-core-interfaces?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Fri, 29 March 2019 09:12 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3729C120261 for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 02:12:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham 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 w_fcBqZSiCXf for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 02:12:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF78E12023E for <core@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 02:12:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-8804.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-8804.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.136.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 44Vwwc1rKBzysS; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 10:12:00 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <541A113C-5FA1-410F-B17F-EC2D194E5079@tzi.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 10:11:59 +0100
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 575543518.247411-d46b055dcf2019c21be080960eb1800e
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F01C6D01-0A30-4D55-AC4D-206B0C7BF9AE@tzi.org>
References: <541A113C-5FA1-410F-B17F-EC2D194E5079@tzi.org>
To: core <core@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/hvGvnmfdnHPHbDW8-iVNw-Z2eiE>
Subject: Re: [core] Should we bury draft-ietf-core-interfaces?
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 09:12:03 -0000

The in-room consensus at IETF104 was that we should not “bury” core-interfaces, but hand it over to T2TRG as raw material (for their documents on IoT design under the REST paradigm).

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email