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

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 30 November 2016 21:02 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 42458129A1F for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 13:02:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.721
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=BHD3owqL; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Q5rP2sH5
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 Ui3zNZzNeZKr for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 13:02:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFCA4129A38 for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 13:00:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0795207B2; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 16:00:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 30 Nov 2016 16:00:25 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=HWQyQOQQjMlISJc DEU+qvY6KC0M=; b=BHD3owqL5ar65wKdfK++JFXA924qHpEl8m09Y5hub0cSgPo KIyTr0xLXHafu6Pc6NLm+i/cg0BftgtI4IIY2vKIav/WJpuWKFerG8u1W69iyreb 7dyaRmm+BK9nh/ivT+jXHBiiterHK/G4BdFFEFzBbA7jNFUMU3RhN6/BywGQ=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= smtpout; bh=HWQyQOQQjMlISJcDEU+qvY6KC0M=; b=Q5rP2sH55rKnjgL23bTW D8tKwMFY40MlnXRYR4qUO2wEHg+cF3YOQPTG5sCR5PhsPcYDqVskj+EKEvx8jmBD mKSt2/E1qBqHaj3HEXqKKv4NQeC42jfVbkeudLTUit9FX4Z9JM3EB3ZaFkxYI2VU hcS/sR+Qg4dwmZUZ6f/qzrA=
X-ME-Sender: <xms:6T0_WFR7olLeEs0U5SUaYUJwwyDHZMr5uIuogVcVzgwlh9h7b4zLbg>
X-Sasl-enc: q+EJsvOHki+b3OazeESuDcUXQu1sshbc+dGC0aRt+50S 1480539625
Received: from sjc-alcoop-8819.cisco.com (unknown [128.107.241.181]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B48797E8C2; Wed, 30 Nov 2016 16:00:24 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <AM5PR0701MB24680C4B1DEBC06EA6A224B7E58C0@AM5PR0701MB2468.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 16:00:23 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5B603E8A-BB04-435E-A721-9D8FF4FBB394@cooperw.in>
References: <AM5PR0701MB2468062E91B51B26AC2396DBE5B70@AM5PR0701MB2468.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <AM5PR0701MB246818833BDFCDA9E5AB9876E58A0@AM5PR0701MB2468.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B4BEB11F2@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <205FED72-32AA-494B-A2B0-3BD579BE9FD3@salsgiver.com> <AM5PR0701MB24680C4B1DEBC06EA6A224B7E58C0@AM5PR0701MB2468.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
To: Ivo Sedlacek <ivo.sedlacek@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ecrit/ei-1AEZ1NeiYF2lqTzfxSZaNTjo>
Cc: "ecrit@ietf.org" <ecrit@ietf.org>, Brian Rosen <br@salsgiver.com>
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: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 21:02:09 -0000

I still need to do my AD evaluation of this document and I have four documents total in my queue for review, so the WG can either work this out before I get to the review (likely next week), or I can put a note in my review to await the text proposal.

Alissa

> On Nov 30, 2016, at 3:51 AM, Ivo Sedlacek <ivo.sedlacek@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I also want to see the suggested text before it is added as part of IETF last call (as indicated by Randall). Even if we don’t get the draft back to the WG, I want the WG to agree on the text.
> 
> I disagree that there is no technical issue here. "attach X to SIP message" can be understood in different ways, nearest one is to "include X with Content-Disposition: attachment in the SIP message" (which is likely not the intended meaning).
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Ivo
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@salsgiver.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 9:28 PM
> To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
> Cc: Ivo Sedlacek <ivo.sedlacek@ericsson.com>om>; ecrit@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Objection to draft-ietf-ecrit-ecall progressing to state "Submitted to IESG for Publication"
> 
> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ecrit mailing list
> Ecrit@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit