IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dime] WGLC for draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr

"Glen Zorn" <gwz@net-zen.net> Sat, 08 January 2011 08:44 UTC

Return-Path: <gwz@net-zen.net>
X-Original-To: dime@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCE9D3A698E for <dime@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 00:44:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cFrzNf-l7qok for <dime@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 00:44:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpauth21.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (smtpauth21.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net [64.202.165.38]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 0BA993A6405 for <dime@ietf.org>; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 00:44:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 13689 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2011 08:46:33 -0000
Received: from unknown (124.120.147.24) by smtpauth21.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.38) with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2011 08:46:32 -0000
From: Glen Zorn <gwz@net-zen.net>
To: dime@ietf.org
References: <20110106191502.10151.87573.idtracker@localhost> <AANLkTi=3TduoqU2Ufcp=diAE=BwvX1KutNQXmX5r5aRa@mail.gmail.com> <EB0843F7-A291-439C-8F20-1F6993576B07@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <EB0843F7-A291-439C-8F20-1F6993576B07@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 15:46:10 +0700
Organization: Network Zen
Message-ID: <002301cbaf10$81bee520$853caf60$@net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcuuvWEF9C7T0F+KTmSI6TPQoZTb2AAUXLpA
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Dime] WGLC for draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diameter Maintanence and Extentions Working Group <dime.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dime>
List-Post: <mailto:dime@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 08:44:28 -0000

Would somebody tell me again why we're issuing an update for a document that
will be obsolete very soon?

This draft appears to be in some conflict w/rfc3588bis; in particular, both
request that IANA register the same set of S-NAPTR Application Protocol
Tags. 

This draft updates RFC 3588 but says nothing about 3588bis; 3588bis says
nothing about this document.  This seems to lead to a dead-end.

This draft is considerably more detailed WRT S-NAPTR than 3588bis.  Why? 

Hope this helps.

 ~gwz

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dime-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Jouni
> Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 5:51 AM
> To: dime@ietf.org
> Cc: dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: [Dime] WGLC for draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr
> 
> Folks,
> 
> We will rerun a short WGLC for draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-04 since
> there were some bigger restructuring on the document. The WGLC starts as
> of today 8th Jan 2011 and ends 14th Jan 2011 23:59 CET+1. If you have
> substantial technical comments, please post them to the list. Purely
> editorial comments can be mailed directly to the authors. Silence will
> be taken as acceptance.
> 
> - Jouni (as a Dime co-chair)
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email