Re: [dns-privacy] Datatracker State Update Notice: <draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-04.txt>

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Tue, 04 February 2020 21:12 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E979E12020A for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:12:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.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 4ZC2pg2Hc0xs for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:12:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.elandsys.com (mx.elandsys.com [162.213.2.210]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D89B120170 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:12:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([102.115.131.51]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPSA id 014LBp7K021699 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:12:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1580850723; x=1580937123; i=@elandsys.com; bh=BYoV3Ka5PtxT2HswiSAcBsYWTFuASskw3W0e3Ezaaa8=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Xf8+JinRVpWW8fpGV5u1AQFow4ixQ7OTMlqD7N/E8rBOuRmoHgKVocv9WV9k+WW59 wOOz7BAIK/SQm9i/9PI8oy6VK2eLcEONysvkwIBKIxUmb6VohZnmYwCi4HR9+WZefI FgRZoTkeS3JynooHDIuvqquK7cHxZV/1zO5ZQo0c=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20200204130324.136c91e8@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 13:11:14 -0800
To: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>, dns-privacy@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <C0BEFB58-A876-4538-B933-166ECF6E795B@cisco.com>
References: <158075564124.28467.7452895727855951898.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <C0BEFB58-A876-4538-B933-166ECF6E795B@cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/0Qj_wRsxnZs-IhEH7EA_ZLSc_vM>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] Datatracker State Update Notice: <draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-04.txt>
X-BeenThere: dns-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dns-privacy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dns-privacy>, <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dns-privacy/>
List-Post: <mailto:dns-privacy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy>, <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 21:12:15 -0000

Hi Eric,

There was the following comment during the Last Call: "18 of these 
points relate to text that is unchanged since the original RFC7626, 
I'll mark these as [RFC7626].  To avoid repetition I'll outline that 
since this text has already received two forms of consensus ..."

The "two forms of consensus" is something which I don't see in any 
"process" document.  Could an Area Director please clarify how that 
"two forms of consensus" works?

Regards,
S. Moonesamy