Re: [Ianaplan] Process concern regarding the IETF proposal development process

Alissa Cooper <> Sat, 31 January 2015 00:56 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73A331A87D9 for <>; Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:56:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fbbZ9ChkCGTR for <>; Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:56:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BFC81A012D for <>; Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:56:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal []) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4505B208D0 for <>; Fri, 30 Jan 2015 19:56:55 -0500 (EST)
Received: from frontend2 ([]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 30 Jan 2015 19:56:55 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h= x-sasl-enc:from:content-type:message-id:mime-version:subject :date:references:to:in-reply-to; s=mesmtp; bh=61A1XQ4ej+x4fJCRJm XUh0tBZVU=; b=lBg8nPdEnLymTppksv5sFM7BNH3jN7LCDMPYKtZsfY4z1Pskmp eKa7piDP7yxUmW9T1YOL9GnNNI+D6TLGCkJlcXdLEUY99kZ5wM6vyhn3HA0oGqqL ExrGD1JnZ7ldPapTj41sNCw/qIWIEb2wxXOgNQ0yZ/+yEzfXVr2KEcMK8=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=x-sasl-enc:from:content-type:message-id :mime-version:subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to; s=smtpout; bh=61A1XQ4ej+x4fJCRJmXUh0tBZVU=; b=peyOCLwSF7In1Qs3LqESvwFV7L48 4s+BklrrcC/N7JnQ1V3gi7mTEjVu84OSob2iBfz1UDyStHX3PqDcW4h5LdOyairS EhSQNUUcWEmUiOoB2SksgNScgHZ+YKF1MYbkx1l5d2rMl/cVGky7853H6RHJVM3x htm8+GjI2/94j5w=
X-Sasl-enc: V+rZi+SwV+COg6BorrScuLgYroDbjAKl1pk5mXBe+GzK 1422665814
Received: from (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B341368020E for <>; Fri, 30 Jan 2015 19:56:54 -0500 (EST)
From: Alissa Cooper <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_AF4E25E7-6DC4-4B9A-BF50-ED78FAB1FF0F"
Message-Id: <>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:56:52 -0800
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Process concern regarding the IETF proposal development process
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IANA Plan <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 00:56:58 -0000


I realize there has been significant discussion on this thread, so the note below from the ICG may appear belated, but I wanted to share it nonetheless.

The ICG suggests that you take all comments the ICG has forwarded to you from about your proposal or the process of creating it as if they were made inside your process and address them as you normally would. 

The ICG is aware of the comments. If the ICG has specific questions to you based on the comments we will explicitly ask them to you as part of our normal ICG process just like any other question we may have.

Let me know if you have questions.

Alissa on behalf of the ICG

On Jan 19, 2015, at 6:33 AM, Alissa Cooper <>; wrote:

> After draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response was submitted to the ICG, the ICG received the following comment:
> _______________________________________________
> Ianaplan mailing list