Re: [Ecrit] Objection to draft-ietf-ecrit-ecall progressing to state "Submitted to IESG for Publication"

Brian Rosen <br@salsgiver.com> Tue, 29 November 2016 20:28 UTC

Return-Path: <br@salsgiver.com>
X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72929129C66 for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 12:28:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 RSoCDoGvD8zn for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 12:28:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from email.salsgiver.com (email.salsgiver.com [206.67.234.106]) (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 BB2601294D3 for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 12:28:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.33.192.18] ([156.154.81.54]) (authenticated bits=0) by email.salsgiver.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPA id uATKSO7B088168; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 15:28:24 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from br@salsgiver.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: email.salsgiver.com: Host [156.154.81.54] claimed to be [10.33.192.18]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Brian Rosen <br@salsgiver.com>
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B4BEB11F2@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 15:28:23 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <205FED72-32AA-494B-A2B0-3BD579BE9FD3@salsgiver.com>
References: <AM5PR0701MB2468062E91B51B26AC2396DBE5B70@AM5PR0701MB2468.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <AM5PR0701MB246818833BDFCDA9E5AB9876E58A0@AM5PR0701MB2468.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B4BEB11F2@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ecrit/Y7KV8Cgg-kiLt-V-loCPaZf7XnY>
Cc: "ecrit@ietf.org" <ecrit@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Objection to draft-ietf-ecrit-ecall progressing to state "Submitted to IESG for Publication"
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ecrit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ecrit/>
List-Post: <mailto:ecrit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 20:28:31 -0000

I object to your objection.

Despite your characterization, there is no technical issue here.  Everyone agrees on how the mechanism works.  There is an editorial issue on interpreting the word “attached”.  I don’t object to wordsmithing to make it more clear, but it’s not a technical problem and it can be dealt with any time before publication.


Brian



> On Nov 29, 2016, at 2:57 PM, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I also indicated (18th October) that I want to solve the issues before we move the draft forward. There have also been suggestions on how to solve issues. 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Christer
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ecrit [mailto:ecrit-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ivo Sedlacek
> Sent: 28 November 2016 12:08
> To: ecrit@ietf.org
> Subject: [Ecrit] Objection to draft-ietf-ecrit-ecall progressing to state "Submitted to IESG for Publication"
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I noticed that WG state of draft-ietf-ecrit-ecall changed to "Submitted to IESG for Publication" despite a comment (ISSUE 7 in the attached) raised during WGLC was not resolved, even though the issue was confirmed by other people and even though it was requested that the issue is solved before publication request.
> 
> I am formally objecting to this state change.
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Ivo Sedlacek
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ecrit mailing list
> Ecrit@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit