Re: [Gen-art] [Ext] [DNSOP] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis-10

Ron Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> Wed, 19 October 2022 18:00 UTC

Return-Path: <ron.even.tlv@gmail.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 8AF6CC14CF12; Wed, 19 Oct 2022 11:00:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VMVqteoBBJjo; Wed, 19 Oct 2022 11:00:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x42a.google.com (mail-pf1-x42a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A744C14F75F; Wed, 19 Oct 2022 11:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x42a.google.com with SMTP id y1so17963914pfr.3; Wed, 19 Oct 2022 11:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wMaQzDLFu+xcQgdi4EjVDLVPUGok5w+ubmvBv5+notQ=; b=UVFQ+YEd0ASPxnRspGHzm0S5RIa+kb79AGuHYlBBJiuQeCZRbLKVFTeZSsYYIEFCtM nxTx+iF4QRTELYTTzwYeXzsQ4z+KHeZJbrpfXINJ0ZD6xz9WgT+A9kl92L1+QCrwoKeb e2xkxaCDEk2BZq556cInxKJuTjL8Zpj8AxivTVb4Vu/okF8qf3SSajQuTDh+rWQXSirR 8GokgHj0N52bmHNKpWRrBDp8xPebpW86HfFsWwdClw1zqhkW5nXxhqQZsFhRqQSR6OAs ar/orSnuevkoRo8yifOXvzShvSu6bxYhUuPi9j6+y92laHin6b5ucX89LP2mLRlTEMTx 3Qgw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=wMaQzDLFu+xcQgdi4EjVDLVPUGok5w+ubmvBv5+notQ=; b=ryJLs509cTb6bhGyCGi1fUw2RKIrtY26xjXivhZ36oqlXvPETWRpwDtIJjqnsAwnm4 mCdamchnz+PxEKuAYABWkFLMTnjZ/lvvqbLlPZtyBJHcpdrF2WFFjzbnbG8sa11scc9z c4NycqZJXJj+E7OQ71VrFuuvTF80F7xOTTwJRiBjrXE8JLHV44Bjf6xER9axGHEAbHnz byasZCA/NWC3zJEJ8S2zrzweMA8787j7SbV6GUPFKs3BYBfIznTA8u+YtdNAqvTrXd0g e+vRfgi2WyQzFKQ+GLD4cZxnPhHtBnTKM0Xpu4wRkpduIaFqa5RxM28tEtLriDx3TL0y 359g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1onn3XU2f1l4zqI/tEBHY7g8irddQF5FHOvx/HSX4FYtgL9sGa ITO6Tpdpm02BeoFENoPKx60sDhGUkT7iFcK8Gsc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7eXjEeMmFA0V6bYYdCnqryu0ECDXi5Lb7tuBxJ7L+0hyaLxFq2wsjbr/zTmY67THVwJFIg976D1nycGuxw3qk=
X-Received: by 2002:a63:4c5f:0:b0:439:49b4:809f with SMTP id m31-20020a634c5f000000b0043949b4809fmr7950715pgl.382.1666202452465; Wed, 19 Oct 2022 11:00:52 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <166566129313.28471.9552612703046827117@ietfa.amsl.com> <147c2505-8b8e-e956-badf-ec633b030547@tcinet.ru> <CAHy0fzBcN9Vd9GRFB157W_23akhpy22yZa=9bV2_91hVdicYPA@mail.gmail.com> <BD832679-C3E6-4EB8-82B6-84D83A47B53D@icann.org> <CAHw9_iJYOPKoAsRR-EWEZUh_MzOWbiAJdMnKTy7CMV6ahErbGA@mail.gmail.com> <CADyWQ+GbaiNdkP7_kzNG4UXJfZb_y2x+gk0s9TJBx_Nm86wr5g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADyWQ+GbaiNdkP7_kzNG4UXJfZb_y2x+gk0s9TJBx_Nm86wr5g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ron Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 21:00:41 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHy0fzCv-wQU+68_MZjqLOS_zhMOB3A3mmK0oc8YNGkt1HJzvg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>, gen-art@ietf.org, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004d9b9605eb66fdd1"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/nfa2o2JDMV3LnzChWYkt9OF9IIs>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [Ext] [DNSOP] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis-10
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 19 Oct 2022 18:00:54 -0000

I am OK with the WG consensus just wanted to make sure that the
maturity level change was considered.
as for the IANA section I am sure that you will update it to clarify what
should be done by IANA
Roni Even

On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 6:27 PM Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I agree with Warren on this, as the chair he and I had several discussions
> sorting out this situation,
> and Mr Hoffman did the work in cleaning up the IANA registrations.
>
> tim
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 11:13 AM Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 7:22 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 18, 2022, at 7:58 AM, Ron Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> 1. whis is this an informational RFC and not a standard track RFC.
>>>
>>> That's a reasonable question with a simple answer: because the WG
>>> changed its mind on what the status of this protocol should be. RFC 5933
>>> describes a national standard that is thinly deployed. At the time, it was
>>> necessary to have the protocol on standards track; now it no longer is
>>> required.
>>>
>>
>> One or two people had also poked me off-list, asking if the process
>> allows for an informational document to update a non-informational
>> document. This appears to be fully allowed by process (and I had checked
>> before advancing the document).
>> I checked on a few documents which Update other documents, and here is a
>> selection of prior instances where this was done.
>>
>> RFC2026 - "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3" (BCP) was
>> updated by both
>> RFC7841 - "RFC Streams, Headers, and Boilerplates" (Informational)
>> and RFC3669 - "Guidelines for Working Groups on Intellectual Property
>> Issues" (Informational)
>>
>>
>> RFC9120 - "Nameservers for the Address and Routing Parameter Area
>> ("arpa") Domain" (Info) updates RFC3172 - "Management Guidelines \&
>> Operational Requirements for the Address and Routing Parameter Area Domain
>> ("arpa") (Best Current Practice)
>>
>>
>> RFC7722 - "Multi-Topology Extension for the Optimized Link State Routing
>> Protocol Version 2 (OLSRv2)" (Exp) updates both RFC7188 - "Optimized Link
>> State Routing Protocol Version 2 (OLSRv2) and MANET Neighborhood Discovery
>> Protocol (NHDP) Extension TLVs" (Standards Track)
>> and RFC7631 - "TLV Naming in the Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET)
>> Generalized Packet/Message Format" (Standards Track)
>>
>>
>> RFC7419 - "Common Interval Support in Bidirectional Forwarding
>> Detection" (Informational) updates  RFC5880 - "Bidirectional Forwarding
>> Detection (BFD)" (Standards Track).
>>
>> W
>>
>>
>>> 2. What is requested from IANA. ths text you wrote and I copied is not a
>>> directive to IANA that is clear
>>>
>>> You are correct that the IANA Considerations section is quite unclear,
>>> and needs to be clarified before the IESG considers it.
>>>
>>> --Paul Hoffman
>>>
>>
>>