[DNSOP] draft-mekking-dnsop-obsolete-dlv

Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 10 July 2019 11:34 UTC

Return-Path: <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE72F12012B for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 04:34:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.702
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.702 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, PDS_NO_HELO_DNS=1.295, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 5kUbsUZEx3Ya for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 04:34:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-x336.google.com (mail-ot1-x336.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::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 D737812024E for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 04:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x336.google.com with SMTP id x21so1751863otq.12 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 04:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Ky54CxnhD2IIs4TD6YmR9NIxr2hQH3ZVzBeoU4FDEGQ=; b=X21/2SeyBur0o/qzN4OQr2moUKdaPJjutdIarlS+aj3TL1b9ACJL7uYx2BySDf2vNn LWyn7Fupj8OabH5IQRFH1F8sI5AKMB5JLtAz0e9j7S20vnk/GPi7g3QRcD9wgV1qVfxq +dCpio1UFrfDGm6hC/Ybxe2K2UKJ5Ex15HPQgfUB6UALboIKOO9XQR225+ROoRwbgaMD JMiQCfj2xIsZrdlX7Axkzj2ynUjTjUYWg61sW9ere2Ske8cSCpPu77MN7RMxSDLbkbpP lrVhIGYOueM1R25bLJuXMobIMShigOZ1rKMT+s5M2oORszPlYWJ880VBYvBxQWdAkRvQ jBrA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Ky54CxnhD2IIs4TD6YmR9NIxr2hQH3ZVzBeoU4FDEGQ=; b=m+W/kS+yrj8JF/lwxzXTC6pc9ewsquSHVWMARewFdrIy441csAfUlfHKcHKUXwu+5B 2Z/v7+0jayFc/9Yk7Oh14co5NIB3e/V6+yxmG3GbLjMAzQh+kHxG1kaDrMDwhKzjdWNJ MZCpPX7miBD+Kn1nFn5REWqGRA4IEFaE8URp9nTwKheUvcCTIbk9YcCC+1UkNaHplkb9 UPuEIhjocPgNWuXE/w5n2u7qZwb18TkwCC3SyODFyTSIZTy1KwEM/tNkPQeol+FXk455 rL/xohr05OQhf6Al3iAT64O9Jv6nxWhcSJtuuJs5vHEv7VAkAhmlgxANXj2q1Acn4Gy/ cAHg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUuDyyo7JG1wuGdEpVaTDozLZJ5Zoi1O5Qtlq5+UsJOMhXvJED0 zH8K4xze29Bt6Ygeo1qRhgWKrDqFA3PXKJJRP9LTM+fx
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw+lCHlUsZVAcL5Oyw354MlbqmOhdVudkkSO3wkFHe6Kp/xRIB8u7dXYiXBR+DrOLoSTYIYLznZupKsDjcy0gY=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:76da:: with SMTP id p26mr2084349otl.311.1562758475036; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 04:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 07:34:24 -0400
Message-ID: <CADyWQ+GkTqMzffuO4FxHYJ6sjoUSLAbp78ZJu7QHMbdd-wCcOg@mail.gmail.com>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c63c04058d520f50"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/1QggkMDp4aOkBdBvIe5cldM-7pc>
Subject: [DNSOP] draft-mekking-dnsop-obsolete-dlv
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 11:34:42 -0000

All


First, we want to thank Matthijs on putting together such a straight
forward and complete document.


After discussing this amongst ourselves, and with our AD, and reading the
specifics here:


https://www.ietf.org/blog/iesg-statement-designating-rfcs-historic/


We are going to take the path of Step 2, which is:


An individual or a working group posts an Internet Draft containing an
explanation of the reason for the status change. The I-D is discussed and
iterated as usual for I-Ds. At some point, it is sent to an appropriate AD
to request publication. The AD creates a status-change document, with an
explanation that points to the I-D. The I-D and the status-change are then
last-called together, after which the IESG evaluates and ballots on both.
If the change is approved, the content of the I-D is moved into the
status-change document, and the I-D is marked as "dead", having served its
purpose.


This method is best when the explanation is not extensive, but needs
document discussion and development.


The Chairs adopt this as a WG Document, and we feel this is something
straightforward enough that any editorial comments can be in within the
next three (3) weeks, wrapping up at the end of IETF105, 26 July 2019.


If anyone feels this is too short a time, please speak now.  Otherwise,
please send any editorial comments to the authors and let's move DLV to the
dustbin of history.


thanks


tim