Re: [Geopriv] -00 Strawman of RFC 3825bis for Review

["Hannes Tschofenig" <[e-mail]>]

I am looking forward to the next version.  

>-----Original Message-----
>From: James M. Polk [mailto:[e-mail]] 
>Sent: 05 June, 2009 11:52
>To: Hannes Tschofenig; 'Bernard Aboba'; [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: [Geopriv] -00 Strawman of RFC 3825bis for Review
>
>Hannes
>
>Please re-read what Richard said about this -- (paraphrasing)
>
>         "the -00 version of this doc will be the text from RFC 3825
>         *with* the new boilerplate, and that's all."
>
>-01 and beyond will have changed text, based on WG consensus 
>of what needs to be changed (i.e., Alissa's 6 items, at least).
>
>James
>
>At 02:54 AM 6/5/2009, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
>>Hi Bernard,
>>
>>the only a few comments at this point in time.
>>
>>I cannot find the person(s) that have brought up the issue, tried to 
>>convince the working group that there is a problem for years and have 
>>submitted documents to explain the issue anywhere in the document 
>>(neither as author(s), contributor(s) nor anything else).
>>
>>That cannot be right.
>>
>>I don't see the guys who implemented this specification (based on 
>>Martin's
>>clarifications) listed in the document either. We should acknowledge 
>>their work a bit more ("Remember: Rough consensus and RUNNING CODE") 
>>given that they are the poor folks who had to decipher our mysterious 
>>specifications and very likely spent a lot of time doing so.
>>
>>Ciao
>>Hannes
>>
>>________________________________
>>
>>         From: [e-mail] 
>>[mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Bernard Aboba
>>         Sent: 05 June, 2009 08:06
>>         To: [e-mail]
>>         Subject: [Geopriv] -00 Strawman of RFC 3825bis for Review
>>
>>
>>         Starting from the text of RFC 3825, I have produced 
>a strawman 
>>-00 draft of RFC 3825bis:
>>
>>http://www.drizzle.com/~aboba/GEOPRIV/draft-ietf-geopriv-rfc38
>25bis-00.
>>txt
>>
>>         Comments welcome.
>>
>>         Other than the editorial changes outlined in Appendix B, the 
>>basis of the -00 strawman is RFC 3825, so that no technical 
>differences should
>>have been introduced.   Just to make sure, I have compared 
>the text to RFC
>>3825 line by line.
>>
>>         The -00 strawman  generates no errors or warings 
>when reviewed 
>>by the ID-NITS tool (see below).
>>
>>         On checking the URLs provided in the Reference section, two 
>>questions arose:
>>
>>         a. EPSG.  One of the URLs given for the EPSG now resolves to 
>>the IHS site map:
>>
>>         http://www.ihsenergy.com/epsg/geodetic2.html
>>
>>         Does this URL need to be updated, removed or left as is?
>>
>>         b. WGS 84.  There is no longer a web site configured at the 
>>cited
>>URL:
>>         http://www.wgs84.com/
>>
>>         Is there an updated URL available?
>>
>>         ===========================================
>>         ID-NITS output
>>
>>         idnits 2.11.11
>>
>>         tmp/draft-ietf-geopriv-rfc3825bis-00.txt:
>>
>>           Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the 
>IETF Trust (see
>>           http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info):
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------
>---------
>>-----
>>
>>              No issues found here.
>>
>>           Checking nits according to
>>http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt:
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------
>---------
>>-----
>>
>>              No issues found here.
>>
>>           Checking nits according to 
>http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html:
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------
>---------
>>-----
>>
>>              No issues found here.
>>
>>           Miscellaneous warnings:
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------
>---------
>>-----
>>
>>           -- The document has a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but 
>>was first
>>              submitted on or after 10 November 2008.  Does it really 
>>need the
>>              disclaimer?
>>
>>
>>           Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------
>---------
>>-----
>>
>>              (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using 
>>normative references
>>              to lower-maturity documents in RFCs)
>>
>>           -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative 
>reference: ref. 'EPSG'
>>
>>           -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative 
>reference: ref. 'WGS84'
>>
>>
>>              Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 warnings (==), 3 
>comments (--).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Geopriv mailing list
>>[e-mail]
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>