IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis-02

"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com> Thu, 18 February 2021 15:23 UTC

Return-Path: <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E2E63A135D; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:23:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=verisign.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 hrbcOhulMn-p; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:23:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail6.verisign.com (mail6.verisign.com [69.58.187.32]) (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 31A333A135A; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:23:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=verisign.com; l=1737; q=dns/txt; s=VRSN; t=1613661813; h=from:to:cc:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject; bh=PuLLYsXOPJzPYwzsWCAx2nPVkCDWCF9RcWn7QMBciyg=; b=DwCLJDMEaeHzMZFJ3bRaVIySNdxXeHcbNf2rMQL5S9cs0HTwnygdYTyC n48oYees0+JlFO8SBW9K63onRTQrcU469Ug/2JKB6LLOpNOaLeVjR4Tqx z4yzBPmjFwHtN+HxzkNi4hrsXs73ILS2VveZVB+sYO5bEbySTYMhYC/qk sNhoxe72u+7Fx57L+Xd8OZ9fnPJ8bx53BU1DuyLesAEnSFX4Bi3KobEsL 7we8/t6f16peRbo7AfqM2kZ+vU0MVmYu/qNjCXlyAo0JLnfIF8GDeDUtw Y43cTQydh5/3wB7ZpkW4QvF4uCvAPtndoJMow9mOSzZosG4NHbQ2+Z4rj w==;
IronPort-SDR: Y46eTkRcq/zz5eeMn1aYDNiykj0wyti4bWEiOYNzzvpZQlwHpZM8LXMM5tPdK6EPhVaMqp1RMO 1uFbmnOTg5IKF5rNPT2ngN4HhRbe81PB6vhmkMvoIZZHNnsZxcwkFTkvpcUb35jy0AJjbVG7aV VmCPeIoH7hgIErsCi4A9QbqTk4jJoKu3/LwZFoLcLaUT+MFYXI3+NDfui+5V8awO65V2k61Tat N+SVSglW8a/nH1AhaEQBgYU94xj6rZewIsvnLHxiYz9ZxwBFot82ExSv+wfFY92gES00y2PwnW SX8=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,187,1610427600"; d="scan'208";a="5279988"
Received: from BRN1WNEX02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (10.173.153.49) by BRN1WNEX02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (10.173.153.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 10:23:25 -0500
Received: from BRN1WNEX02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([fe80::7c0a:1cc:5def:9dde]) by BRN1WNEX02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([fe80::7c0a:1cc:5def:9dde%4]) with mapi id 15.01.2176.002; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 10:23:25 -0500
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
To: "kaduk@mit.edu" <kaduk@mit.edu>
CC: "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>, "dromasca@gmail.com" <dromasca@gmail.com>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis.all@ietf.org>, "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis-02
Thread-Index: AQHXA/Ya0RezzlapuEWMbOQE093y0KpeC65g
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:23:25 +0000
Message-ID: <0f0401882b3047df9665e44de78c93f5@verisign.com>
References: <7219c963c81d4a94a46f698f1f3894ff@verisign.com> <20210215235548.GN21@kduck.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20210215235548.GN21@kduck.mit.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.170.148.18]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/BlRGP4q9p3JjJTdpR1oj2BXZv_0>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis-02
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:23:34 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
> Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 6:56 PM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
> Cc: last-call@ietf.org; dromasca@gmail.com; gen-art@ietf.org; draft-ietf-
> regext-rfc7482bis.all@ietf.org; regext@ietf.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-
> regext-rfc7482bis-02
>
> Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links
> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
> is safe.
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> > Dan, thanks for the review. Would you please give me a little more on
> > what you think is needed to explain the relationship between the two
> > documents? I can't think of much more to say beyond "7482 describes
> > protocol queries" and "7483 describes protocol responses to the
> > queries described in 7482", but would adding a few sentences to that
> > effect in the Introduction do what you're suggesting? Of course, the
> > RFC numbers will need to be updated.
>
> I think the idea was (at least partially) that this, as rfc7482bis, should describe
> its relationship with rfc7482-not-bis (e.g., that it obsoletes the latter for
> purpose of advancing the protocol to Internet Standard), in both Abstract
> and Introduction.  The fact that this document is not listed as having an
> Obsoletes: relationship to rfc7482 (outside of the shepherd
> writeup) makes the question of what exactly the relationship between the
> two is much more interesting...

[SAH] OK, understood. I can add text to the header, Abstract, and Introduction to note that 7482bis and 7483bis obsolete their predecessors.

Scott

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email