IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dispatch] Tiny update to RFC 3405

Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com> Sat, 04 July 2020 09:27 UTC

Return-Path: <tim@dropnumber.com>
X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FC673A07FC for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 4 Jul 2020 02:27:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.798
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.798 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.1, SPF_NONE=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 mHc4ccxpDbaP for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 4 Jul 2020 02:27:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 417203A07FB for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Sat, 4 Jul 2020 02:27:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oxuslxaltgw02.schlund.de ([10.72.76.58]) by mrelay.perfora.net (mreueus002 [74.208.5.2]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MVwAo-1kOceH0sRM-00X5ZK; Sat, 04 Jul 2020 11:21:37 +0200
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2020 05:21:28 -0400
From: Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com>
Reply-To: Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com>
To: DISPATCH WG <dispatch@ietf.org>, superuser@gmail.com, barryleiba@computer.org
Message-ID: <1007260719.140376.1593854488478@email.ionos.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.1-Rev31
X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:+ILLu90aboP0jvOz4T8AVsgX03fDlZOS7gY6Hd649lzTKT9Y6J+ KxkMoQD4ZjY3IR7aCWXLN3Q6KZj6hNKJGyqnI55nwlmfhIRibGLkB8YXHlMBqTAZkPANXcL CJgzkKXcc6prlCX8qM8djbPfZHbBefeh+MnXMJ/22/w4RC2zt/oYNXyyFRXJ36vJF8osF3l go01HAfwwAbvmWcgfw3aA==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:IEXEgqxqIL0=:QPn4P+xwTpVe20K8hTSW8s yXpZAMGCPyQkzKDf/xtFuU24uIFJkUZ2Hk5WnRruLkixOP4L0HsCGhokBpeWE8vgkXBHlhW+e jEUUiInsxiiYB4EK6DGa5jRIXuI/sOVy1KMXyHZsBMg/FFMXlR3+JAxlnqB7ppmWZWaZcB1pU wmmxZRRA+xGVdIarao70mMfpUPJYopUeGoPyOIw0zgPfRiRyRrvDk8qJwVLeYk3JuqNXSOxOw xVMMX6gYcHXNxt2vUzFIRXkl65DJumeoCkDCO1tW2Tph8hEJqtZqoSTiKuRG1jxgcYKucKg1h 7IrsH6EG50n5Lvro/x0v7W6Tk14AYTgS695C6RdfhUeyUGNFpi6ioBkvWRaEBAzAX9U9IArwY gPqmNuTcV92gIewU7f258WTe6wIHqVpdeqVjGNQQKb1ti6JnpUVhRXGJBEGyCEoTTZTxC4PJ/ 7fQe2arlpR0K8tj+d4ROLrbzZMFRykIHPDOKMz+IjJN3bDo6AVQL+gThCas8Uuu+ThxPH4i1N Y/sVUO8fNEYPN08j9nJ3IEzUnJBPHuMQ30xkrKeJVSa0ZoesXp94K2uf4WaOksDr8MCJm2rNu /STjVe1MkwFAczKdTRUpTumKy1fHgh6TazpCOstc7WzYC5WcHYETSEDz5Jbg+9em3EBNjpExM wQJ/UqP9jg1nq5Jb5wj5V6XBuXGCz5+IeHPkYg/96XMT2qENXlGTLcHRNOY9TnLdMrOT1Q3OZ JMTgYIamBcSvLmG/QYqFAdhZlqYWqXYCF91DvK0cU3yt3iJTvR2+txz8m967KjSLHxigBI8yP u2FnolFrN5mn2BpwjSJ1LvRbgjz9WclvNcMl/9JQAFQBpVioPNMmCnLbXVUcmSpTIGP8kOX
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/wmCbL1KKJCCK5H7BBFewR0LHBtk>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] Tiny update to RFC 3405
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2020 09:27:58 -0000

Ted, 
In your opening email to the 400 highly respectable people on this list you say:
"As it happens, there are very few registrations in URI.ARPA, so we did not catch it and fix it before now."  

How did you "catch it"? 
Was there a pending registration? 
Is there still a pending registration? 
It would really be bad to try to change the rules while something was pending.

I can't speak for the others but some of them might want to know why after almost 20 years of there being zero problems with RFC3405 it suddenly needs to get "fixed".

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email