Re: [homenet] The HOMENET WG has placed draft-tldm-simple-homenet-naming in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk> Mon, 31 July 2017 10:00 UTC

Return-Path: <ray@bellis.me.uk>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EA11132069 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 03:00:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 LOI58sqtcv9Q for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 03:00:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hydrogen.portfast.net (hydrogen.portfast.net [188.246.200.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD217132059 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 03:00:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [46.227.151.81] (port=53362 helo=rays-mbp.local) by hydrogen.portfast.net ([188.246.200.2]:465) with esmtpsa (fixed_plain:ray@bellis.me.uk) (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) id 1dc7Uq-0001Ho-Ci (Exim 4.72) for homenet@ietf.org (return-path <ray@bellis.me.uk>); Mon, 31 Jul 2017 11:00:20 +0100
To: homenet@ietf.org
References: <150124709279.25258.15094387920433065465.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DBE0147@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <12743.1501435181@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <F9E968C3-1EA7-4518-A582-4E5DE923A33E@jisc.ac.uk> <6265.1501464056@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <AF836D5F-3322-4A81-9B7B-77CEADC6AF0C@fugue.com>
From: Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>
Message-ID: <6ff80652-8dfc-3a1f-882b-1e4089133515@bellis.me.uk>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 11:00:20 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AF836D5F-3322-4A81-9B7B-77CEADC6AF0C@fugue.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/U9LFoM1If_vXCkTtw1sOgBJFQ80>
Subject: Re: [homenet] The HOMENET WG has placed draft-tldm-simple-homenet-naming in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:00:24 -0000

On 31/07/2017 10:53, Ted Lemon wrote:

> Daniel wanted to do another update, but we needed to sync up first, and
> I don't know where he is at with that now, but I think it would be
> reasonable to put the CFA on hold pending that update.   There have been
> some good comments already, though; in particular, I think Juliusz'
> point that it would be nice to actually try some of this in practice is
> good, and is what I'm working on now.   I think having that done before
> the document is adopted is a pretty high bar, but I don't really care
> either way.
> 
> That said, what I said in the working group is that we've been spinning
> our wheels on this for several years, and I wanted to know if the scope
> of this is reasonable and is what the working group wants to take on.  
> If it's not, then I don't actually know how to proceed.

The point of a CFA is not to have a document that's nearly ready to publish.

It's to get agreement that a document is an appropriate direction for
the WG to explore, even if it might require substantial work.

As part of that, adoption also cedes change control from the authors to
the WG.

I'd therefore like to leave this in place for now, and request that
reviewers re-examine it bearing the above in mind.

thanks,

Ray