IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art telechat review: draft-mcdonald-ipps-uri-scheme-17

Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com> Wed, 03 December 2014 04:51 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 256B31A008C; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 20:51:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.011
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.011 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_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 mc2IB_0WPm81; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 20:51:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sabertooth02.qualcomm.com (sabertooth02.qualcomm.com [65.197.215.38]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 492FD1A008D; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 20:51:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qti.qualcomm.com; i=@qti.qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1417582278; x=1449118278; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3oxMW06tlUatF6IthAuSEcWyoz6Hj7p9ZC3MqxfQF7s=; b=BO++f6cXutk5GNggG7Pm/q24mtnUL8VyaxjTGLwTc/XB/3iBK4TG6aNQ 1l3wrxT6cWbWPlB4v8trzprC1roYywPGxMffw0Bpyz9vIiMB2JqMTCIXR 7Dlfzi5/x75yJYw/MAEDavZBRL2D1IsZ4cKp6kZsJmlXg+luYZLtXziNp 8=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5600,1067,7640"; a="79920658"
Received: from ironmsg04-l.qualcomm.com ([172.30.48.19]) by sabertooth02.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 02 Dec 2014 20:51:17 -0800
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,505,1413270000"; d="scan'208";a="763312344"
Received: from nasanexm01f.na.qualcomm.com ([10.85.0.32]) by Ironmsg04-L.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 02 Dec 2014 20:51:16 -0800
Received: from resnick2.qualcomm.com (10.80.80.8) by NASANEXM01F.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.913.22; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 20:51:16 -0800
Message-ID: <547E96C1.5060703@qti.qualcomm.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2014 22:51:13 -0600
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100630 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
References: <546FB4E7.7060704@nostrum.com> <547DE944.9000709@nostrum.com> <CALaySJ+gpLBcVCF_kwbPf4MkQr_8nm5KsZaHXH_FDCaZFF7=Og@mail.gmail.com> <547DF327.6040803@nostrum.com> <CALaySJ+Kc_7siz8EGefJ+bR9d1ztwPvbwR7AA55e9v6Mx550ng@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJ+Kc_7siz8EGefJ+bR9d1ztwPvbwR7AA55e9v6Mx550ng@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.80.80.8]
X-ClientProxiedBy: NASANEXM01F.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.32) To NASANEXM01F.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.32)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/GaYDStAaWNln1-3Vx6R-_44azqM
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-mcdonald-ipps-uri-scheme.all@tools.ietf.org, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art telechat review: draft-mcdonald-ipps-uri-scheme-17
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 03 Dec 2014 04:51:22 -0000

On 12/2/14 11:20 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:
>>> When you suggest saying more, are you suggesting saying more in the
>>> document?
>>>        
>> I mostly meant the writeup - I expect there will be IESG folks with the same
>> questions I had.
>>      
> I can do that, sure.
>
>    
>>     This document updates:
>>      ...
>>     c) IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP Version 2.0 Second Edition [PWG5100.12], by
>>        extending section 4 'IPP Standards' and section 10 'Security
>>        Considerations'.
>>
>> This RFC-to-be is updating an IEEE-ISTO PWG document, and that seems
>> exceptional enough to warrant mention about how the organizations
>> are coordinating that update.
>>      
> I'd think that's for PWG to address on their side, no?  If they accept
> that they can have an IETF RFC formally updating one of their
> documents, that's their process, not ours, no?
>    

This is to be an IETF document. If the PWG wants to say in one of their 
documents that PWG5100.12 is updated by this IETF document, that's their 
business. But *we* can't say in *our* document that we're updating their 
document. If you need a note, it could say:

       Note: IEEE-ISTO PWG has indicated that they intend to use this
       document as an update to their IPP Version 2.0 Second Edition
       [PWG5100.12], by extending section 4 'IPP Standards' and section
       10 'Security Considerations'.

But (c) should go.

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email