IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art LC Review of? draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-13

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Fri, 18 May 2018 17:08 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 9CD8D12D86B; Fri, 18 May 2018 10:08:59 -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=wbiqkh46; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=CsTjavFH
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 QbK9Hi2JiFdT; Fri, 18 May 2018 10:08:57 -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 8B7F912D7F6; Fri, 18 May 2018 10:08:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C652C22577; Fri, 18 May 2018 13:08:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 18 May 2018 13:08:56 -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=fm3; bh=hjbMiTf4lEOzfAEbF77AkJFXKtvn9 PxjPQIz7j89JQk=; b=wbiqkh46sti2FkeN5A+t0Vguf65xHxfRA8NabkCl6QLuv Moqc17+R+u68EavaY80uQhc31PhE62Puv7vjK/qegCTBfhm4TNljjfSG+sqUh9GU ElAnVQKxUIHfleVegEdlyRpbhLLwfG2bTS0qNh4gkZ6BcHcpQsuHjsp3mEpNMBa9 DJtJSutNhK/KC26grs/R7ov3MK5gESmRhCACFcH5FjLwvsCuODtk5S/zWbLRg+sY VvUW3WS1XJCgOMGwNlCctoFPlG9SgzC/EBDufki9pR06FFpFKFKzzdd2xCf0FU5z UvwSOGqyYQA/I3uzsJdFp6kAJ4cloakNG97Rpupyg==
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=fm2; bh=hjbMiT f4lEOzfAEbF77AkJFXKtvn9PxjPQIz7j89JQk=; b=CsTjavFHX4h8nO75miQwEm D+cGMSmF2RYiuOEd1EVQ95XD/tuJPvUR2OjnaZA1pJe3aJnmy95mk2bS0ql13+lL 2M0dZgJCz0HLp0Il2YWBXQFgGryV/pddddd6TwTWCkOTkajPKlF3wZnncSWm3t9c 6om9fW08n9RP4BJtz9KQd8BRtBUrrnLQ7bYO7fK/SnC1nU/O6O0F5Tj+WOrvF3A3 7PthyTezzZL/C8aU1zeqkOExdmeQZvXtz5HaQgC/+fJESNrDnvO59okyHctr75JE nU1lL9Adtk+qzlVoET7zUWz1+e60PK/wbsxzDPKac703AD7o6uLxCesq1MRM0rVg ==
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:qAj_Wl6phGREYIGr8fpGMBafLZ-0L8gfcPoGBDXSzjOXmcfu3VJp8Q>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:qAj_WsXGj1C-4HzITqdKUhMQFp2XvUF7msbEOrd6NppxaW7-YQU-Dw>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:qAj_WsDt_tsHZQBGsMOaoWPeYrG6JJFYDESVSN1qkOmM2Vnpq7ld0Q>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:qAj_Wj7OEOppn5vmUZGaX1LKJjMVtoHF_RyO854d1Yp4gP-8AJLQEg>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:qAj_WvxqyMIICOL2ZjWBH6C_LO6ppbCOBMbthNz_NuCpCIY5h2dztg>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:qAj_WkbMee2yf17i6VYmnYTUZ4dLisTXCYzR5bCdF9FY8NIhVamB8g>
X-ME-Sender: <xms:qAj_Wla5T2c754HTOlruHZYrbk5Omd0JYfHCrL662iGLCs-OwLPSmw>
Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.79]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 3235010265; Fri, 18 May 2018 13:08:56 -0400 (EDT)
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: <20180419005041.qotqshfc7vkht45o@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 13:08:55 -0400
Cc: Elwyn Davies <elwynd@dial.pipex.com>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane.all@ietf.org, anima@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <83000761-CA05-4DAC-92E3-27C8C06DDDDC@cooperw.in>
References: <2vnnj4bct7mlx8ulb604r9tc.1524096293973@email.android.com> <20180419005041.qotqshfc7vkht45o@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/fO9faW-DYkmZ1EF7adI_9f_-KlA>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art LC Review of? draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-13
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:09:00 -0000

Hi,

I was wondering if any response to Elwyn’s review besides Brian’s is forthcoming and if so when the authors or shepherd expect to send it.

Thanks,
Alissa

> On Apr 18, 2018, at 8:50 PM, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
> 
> Sorry, trying to get through backlog. Took longer than expected...
> 
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 01:04:53AM +0100, Elwyn Davies wrote:
>> Hi.
>> It has been about 6 weeks since responses to the review were postponed till after IETF 101.... any thoughts yet?
>> Regards,Elwyn
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from Samsung tablet.
>> -------- Original message --------From: Elwyn Davies <elwynd@dial.pipex.com> Date: 02/03/2018  12:04  (GMT+00:00) To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, gen-art@ietf.org Cc: draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane.all@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art LC Review of
>>   draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-13 
>> Just taking up one point for the time being....  
>> Even if the reference model is informational, I was relying on RFC 8067, s1, para 3:
>>    Section 2 of [RFC3967] lists some conditions under which downrefs may
>>    make sense.  In addition to those, it has become common for working
>>    groups to produce foundational documents (which contain important
>>    information such as terminology definitions and architectural design
>>    and considerations) at Informational status, and those documents are
>>    often needed as normative references in the Standards Track protocol
>>    documents that follow. 
>> I would say that sombody implementing ACP really needs to have read and understood the reference model and so I would argue:1. That it needs to be normative,and2. The downref is sanctioned by the language in RFC 8067. 
>> I am on holiday for a week and others are fighting the draft deadline so perhaps we can postpone discussion of the other points until the draft panic has subsided.
>> Cheers,Elwyn
>> Sent from Samsung tablet.
> 
> -- 
> ---
> tte@cs.fau.de
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email