IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Wed, 21 November 2018 03:14 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.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 C76E812896A; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 19:14:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.88
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.88 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] 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 H2TKRJF94iJe; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 19:14:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 2834E126DBF; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 19:14:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Svantevit.roach.at (99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id wAL3DjuF016907 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 20 Nov 2018 21:13:52 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228] claimed to be Svantevit.roach.at
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <dnsop@ietf.org>
References: <154276614451.29753.3535998981795767703.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <E351BE3A-9B45-43E2-9B69-5F849CEEDA87@icann.org>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <312930c8-ab91-31d0-be64-6247787a2957@nostrum.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 21:13:40 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <E351BE3A-9B45-43E2-9B69-5F849CEEDA87@icann.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/_R5S5mZ6ZcYRCEvOx2OJo6VXkDA>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-capture-format-08: (with COMMENT)
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, 21 Nov 2018 03:14:17 -0000

On 11/20/18 8:42 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Nov 20, 2018, at 6:09 PM, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote:
>> §5:
>>
>>> o  CBOR is an IETF standard and familiar to IETF participants.  It is
>> While CBOR is standards-track, it's nowhere near standard yet. Suggest:
>> "...is an IETF specification..." (See BCP 9)
> The CBOR WG is actively working on moving CBOR to Internet Standard, so "nowhere near" feels overstated.


This is, of course, somewhat subjective and not really worth arguing 
over, but I think it's defensible when talking about a document that 
isn't even an RFC yet.


> If you are trying to get the wording in this draft correct by BCP 9, the correction should be to "... is a Proposed Standard...".


That won't age well.

/a

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email