IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-taps-minset-08

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 12 September 2018 19:27 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 2296A130EAC; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 12:27:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=sXlxKsr9; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=WBkeeXv0
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 pFbxgOACckJg; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 12:27:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 934F8130EB3; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 12:27:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9178121B20; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 15:27:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 12 Sep 2018 15:27:10 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; 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; s=fm1; bh=66Av5BqiX5msbE6dkKMRcsL8Tav/n Xkeg5yiLvDz1s8=; b=sXlxKsr9/MJSAitgtCUwaRwdjCjzeiBL0OyGyMjW0yRnB +XQeyvtzOgSNviE8+zzXeJY5wTNUuV6fd7G+VtlGgrGRh3m/aRSlmArzMnYf8bLG Q4UHjaMIaGqNYhdnyLi2gaHS6ZRh31HZrWjqmAEp0htjwE2TjSx21nXuy1R6VyZT b4BeLHKeqPFm/+6w80UT3rh20+2gstmCs8PCmMXWvgi5425MKJuOSsWyoPj0gLl4 JodFFiCUBuU7rHUP2ldRHoztiAaf9LTCVM2HFg0lFdAONKj4eC/10/d/pmlA368O oK3CyE3YaM7IP+JAn/WoN2d2WsjYxoZV5V4wZ7VAQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; 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; s=fm3; bh=66Av5B qiX5msbE6dkKMRcsL8Tav/nXkeg5yiLvDz1s8=; b=WBkeeXv088rXiz3JBRv8/a cTYnN334ZYGglpWJJQfgGFo1uED2wRIzZlD1vhyyeCyVOl5TjUhnkwPa7NXNr2hs mOL+t+yL7xY/1lDwwE3Ots6J5NJybXYfvUQia9dS0ypmHHgXHbGKdAVJEjpksQXH u38EXFXbDknxkTsboSw9VRGGfd3T38agi+hv1nTCqfJEJRPNAv1/nKVKVE+fPBWm C6YZto3cX7mz/QnvsgBVg4vrycuaIvl67QWjfr7sjiGQ/VDeySTnWmU9h8ijYb/d f2FYsT7Bc3lDVz2pZncQaMSkipe5uTZcHHTJ7DH+1K5rgXjfEaorO6k3+ypn15tA ==
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:jmiZW_tXTofvKq4pufXkUqTZEK5ERplIiNQv18e--v4gnST4cn0oJw> <xmx:jmiZW7cIpzYJoZmIE7IyXtSwuFZuwdk9Lftjkt0IRh0mYauy8qh7lg> <xmx:jmiZW5Zyb-CvvBv9SKalsetHK142vrpl8F-MG9F_z6YI7WsDBJgZ6g> <xmx:jmiZW72f92ULFa93E3CeKMpX9FJYeeTvUzOBjGWpKpshMc8JsY3b0A> <xmx:jmiZW6r3H1xua9D4z5Er5-6Z2eWDZF5C7wNrfzsGx1__-1kbPdx1pA> <xmx:jmiZW0i8e2WCgfkiAdPXyZ0TRmUzYPweuh5jlogddnS_1e7uFQoh-g>
X-ME-Sender: <xms:jmiZW1Y0AfZUYUA1bqO51eYkap3GyKMLJWMSkMTlF3GZ35ZOlUUfiA>
Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (nccm-cmcs-client.cisco.com [173.38.117.70]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B53F1E454E; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 15:27:09 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <153626446703.11686.5776675418414453097@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 15:27:08 -0400
Cc: gen-art <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-taps-minset.all@ietf.org, taps@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5282E49F-3A9E-4408-B1BD-8B4F929A673E@cooperw.in>
References: <153626446703.11686.5776675418414453097@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/F7c0TT47CSnizcb0K3pgjsWzFik>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-taps-minset-08
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: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 19:27:13 -0000

Robert, thanks for your review. I initially had the same reaction. But then digging a little more into the TAPS document set and charter I started having the opposite question, which is that if the minimal service set is meant to be constraining on transport systems, why shouldn’t it be standardized rather than informational? I have put that question in my DISCUSS ballot.

Alissa

> On Sep 6, 2018, at 4:07 PM, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Robert Sparks
> Review result: Ready
> 
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your
> document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
> 
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-taps-minset-08
> Reviewer: Robert Sparks
> Review Date: 2018-09-06
> IETF LC End Date: 2018-09-04
> IESG Telechat date: 2018-09-13
> 
> Summary: Ready for publication as an Informational RFC
> 
> (Repeating one thing from my Last Call review for the benefit of the IESG):
> 
> This was a big effort, and it appears that it was helpful to the folks
> working on the interface document, but it's not clear how it will be
> useful to implementers. The IESG should consider  whether this, like
> requirements documents, needs to be in the RFC series. The most likely
> use I can see in the future would be for historians, and a different
> and shorter presentation would serve them better.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email