Re: [Gendispatch] First comments on draft-rsalz-2028bis-00.txt

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Thu, 09 September 2021 14:23 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E6943A1406 for <gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Sep 2021 07:23:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.65
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.65 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 JN2sfvXstA2X for <gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Sep 2021 07:23:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vs1-f42.google.com (mail-vs1-f42.google.com [209.85.217.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 588243A1405 for <gendispatch@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Sep 2021 07:23:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vs1-f42.google.com with SMTP id s25so1675025vsa.9 for <gendispatch@ietf.org>; Thu, 09 Sep 2021 07:23:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=aovL1HJKnNynuMIR9NBzpAye1xNprLHAzsp8Mk6pQpg=; b=PDtJdQ+M/f7O+yO+DrO0ZCGZieszCltveuNjTyx0bEtztlmtACmJV57CO6VygRTxEF Mz5O0mUoMLxoVlp6lrjeBjDX06f75I86o0oX/n0vNGsfndhurP70yynTwaVBHPuAVucl uWhuUiBU7E0E2L1q9vX/+qYdQ/Aw1/gxz3oBOsX1H59pKIu7P5Oy4I9tNrZCst4auojT ZtaNPIYafpQlsAIU3C2inC5ROUKAurmnvZxjqtKCRWNY7FmpbCwFyM3D0Cu8bn+Gla3N BE6T8zGyKqiXKTbobpbTo+9unE1yB60Me66TGW2XCSsA9YxhapAkfjVzENxu+afAGyB6 3zaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532sFDjCjY7hI+KQbdF8W+ELhezR/CH1gV5mhUKH0b/jUsUDiANc qZCb7lT/vB57FzyEl/4RPLFbe8dPpvZhndnX9Rc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzeDG7PUBolRKpO4Hyn3iqV4h0g/50a+bFmL4A+vtrc9a3ofV2bkhNa27egNfHS8EcBpNNqHrbpHdvgGc62FEU=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:ee19:: with SMTP id f25mr1939444vsp.30.1631197427314; Thu, 09 Sep 2021 07:23:47 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <163069758370.6471.14990302329155864755@ietfa.amsl.com> <A21C8B4C-C2E1-4C4D-AB6F-C3C2FF5BF23A@akamai.com> <9b9c0e2d-c997-431c-6cc0-326b85992c72@lear.ch> <84a84b50-e8ce-da68-9115-83b392043683@gmail.com> <18205B44-72C5-4A59-93F4-A39FEA3384A1@akamai.com> <CALaySJLTUHj6ZJ8Yn_99nQLN3g8h00R7w6+4NoEa3-SAf6KQgQ@mail.gmail.com> <B6C94725-2EBB-42E6-916E-A2762A0E35FE@akamai.com>
In-Reply-To: <B6C94725-2EBB-42E6-916E-A2762A0E35FE@akamai.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2021 10:23:36 -0400
Message-ID: <CALaySJL4Gw96BxgHy0_iqTUqSa-Yke3bDfzRu-eCPntKhuYxhA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
Cc: "gendispatch@ietf.org" <gendispatch@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/TsjR6AndLx885EGMDS1PpvFe9rY>
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] First comments on draft-rsalz-2028bis-00.txt
X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Area Dispatch <gendispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:gendispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2021 14:23:50 -0000

Thanks for addressing my comments, Rich.  On the open question:

>     Sections 4.8 and 4.9 don't try to talk about how the members (of the
>     Trust and the LLC Board) are selected or confirmed, and simply refer
>     to the BCPs.  It's probably best if 4.3 and 4.4 follow that as well
>     (making my previous paragraph moot).
>
> I think the summary that's there is worthwhile to readers. I suppose I
> could add how the LLC and Trust Board is picked. One argument against
> that is, like above, it's not something many deal with.  Thoughts?

I'm ambivalent.  On the one hand, I like to have things specified in
one place, so we don't have to update multiple things when something
changes.  On the other, these details aren't likely to change, so I
don't see much harm in summarising them here.  So for me, I'd leave it
to your judgment how to keep the document internally consistent.

Barry