Re: [Gen-art] [regext] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-11

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Tue, 15 October 2019 18:03 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.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 7A43A12080D; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 11:03:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 xjnS3iOznsEX; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 11:03:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7DBD12084D; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 11:03:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1iKRAH-000FP5-Bb; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 14:03:21 -0400
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 14:03:14 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Joel Halpern Direct <jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com>, Jiankang Yao <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
cc: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, regext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <2B9A832DC0C20A40FAF033B2@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <c32157cf-3b18-fd01-9f0d-29bd6f4d4645@joelhalpern.com>
References: <157074817849.20459.11318968277639852496@ietfa.amsl.com> <754e85cd.1470.16dce6a353a.Coremail.yaojk@cnnic.cn> <cffa265b-5df3-fdea-f57a-7af30880a154@joelhalpern.com> <5D394E0244700A5D092F1181@PSB> <c32157cf-3b18-fd01-9f0d-29bd6f4d4645@joelhalpern.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/VeACIwp4ewejIisGr5uTKCs_GpI>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [regext] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-11
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: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 18:03:32 -0000

Joel,

Agreed.  And that is more or less what my notes of two days ago
said.  I apparently went into too much detail about the terms
and the issues with them and the messages apparently got lost in
the noise.

best,
   john

--On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 13:52 -0400 Joel Halpern Direct
<jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com>; wrote:

> If we do not have agreement on what the meaning is for the
> relevant terms, then either
> 1) The document should not be an IETF consensus document
> (which even Informational publication is)
> or
> 2) The document should be Experimental, indicating explicitly
> that there is ambiguity in the terms, and one of the points of
> the experiment would be to find out if that matters.