Re: [dsii] Potential IETF Work Items

Ted Hardie <> Wed, 15 August 2012 15:46 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1653521F8606 for <>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 08:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.897
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.298, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z-ZgmtH8SGC9 for <>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 08:46:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C671321F85A5 for <>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 08:46:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vbbez10 with SMTP id ez10so1872449vbb.31 for <>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 08:46:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=QZTz/vBUsHzPIK53rls5GjVh7SJ2XK7TCLkFTP/vG3M=; b=wDqLASFiyx8S5y5qE7O71p8YYQDdN786EHCzRsw8PSRQoC8n/KrutH/e6Ah3aOI0vf Hf0DZKVRbZJeSGadjfx/lJIiH/M0MuygNjFf6e7k3ZHGCGWci3otfNyrv2OVr0ZUAfWH r49Ieh+bDEwIPwBFr+zAOCCBRygu0WZbLIcfYesu3PJYQQspIA4cBQRcdZYqR4QNw5HV vzDxOMaY6gi/stYA1uqsdp6Cv6ZwZmqjPwyCAQ53UDanYfDpmmw546Qpt8spHyapyeGT VgqkI4asw1VIqAEndEWBQyF61ugtGmXP4LSkzIH5FYzGROlGnQJx3JDNmeWlaUOcfGyK vFNA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id i7mr13060090vcw.34.1345045599265; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 08:46:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 08:46:39 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 08:46:39 -0700
Message-ID: <>
From: Ted Hardie <>
To: Melinda Shore <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [dsii] Potential IETF Work Items
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:46:41 -0000

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Melinda Shore
<> wrote:
> It seems to me that it might be a good idea for the IETF guys
> to take a step back and let the non-IETF people with specific
> expertise to sort out what problems they need to have solved.

I don't think the intent here was for the current IETF guys to drive
this; it was to provide a vehicle (WG) for the current DSII folks to
drive, without them having to tool up their own set of mechanics, road
makers, and so on.  If they take us up on that, they become IETF folks
as well, which solves the problem you raise.

Without them coming to participate, it would be silly and presumptuous
for the IETF to take on the work, and I assume the IESG would want
solid evidence of participation from the relevant community before
chartering the work.  But if they do decide to use our structures, I
personally believe that we'd get some reasonable cross fertilization.

Just my two cents,

Ted Hardie