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

["DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <[e-mail]>]

I saying nothing more than is in the following message.

So somehow consensus calls will be made on issues accompanied by text proposals in the tracker.

Keith

From:	[e-mail] on behalf of Richard Barnes [[e-mail]]
Sent:	03 June 2009 02:04
To:	'GEOPRIV'
Subject:	[Geopriv] Plan for 3825bis

Hi all,

Wanted to send an update outlining a little bit of process for how we're
going to manage the production of a 3825bis document.  Because there is
a desire in the group to manage carefully the differences between this
update and RFC 3825, we'll use the following process:

1. The -00 draft will just be RFC 3825 with updated boilerplate.

2. Issues and proposed resolutions will be proposed to the list and
entered as tickets for the milestone draft-ietf-geopriv-3825bis on the
geopriv trac page:
<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/geopriv/trac/report/1>
(Note: you will need an account on the tools page to do this.  Let me
know if this is an issue for you.)

3. Based on discussion on the list, changes will either be added to the
document or dropped, with the corresponding result noted in trac.
Issues with widespread agreement will be added as the editor sees fit;
issues that are more contentious may require a consensus call.

I have seeded the tracker with a set of changes that were agreed to at
the virtual interim and in subsequent consensus calls.

Bernard Aboba has graciously agreed to serve as editor for this
document, and should have an initial version out soon.

Thanks,
--Richard



_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:[e-mail]] 
> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 12:17 PM
> To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith); 'James M. Polk'; 'Bernard Aboba'; 
> [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: [Geopriv] -00 Strawman of RFC 3825bis for Review
> 
> It is the responsibility of the working group chairs to 
> select the authors of a document.
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: DRAGE, Keith (Keith) [mailto:[e-mail]]
> >Sent: 05 June, 2009 13:38
> >To: Hannes Tschofenig; 'James M. Polk'; 'Bernard Aboba'; 
> >[e-mail]
> >Subject: RE: [Geopriv] -00 Strawman of RFC 3825bis for Review
> >
> >You get the next version by proposing precise text against 
> the listed 
> >open issues, or by opening another issue.
> >
> >Keith
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [e-mail]
> >> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Hannes Tschofenig
> >> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 10:04 AM
> >> To: 'James M. Polk'; 'Bernard Aboba'; [e-mail]
> >> Subject: Re: [Geopriv] -00 Strawman of RFC 3825bis for Review
> >> 
> >> 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
> >> >
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Geopriv mailing list
> >> [e-mail]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
> >> 
> >
> 
>