IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ianaplan] [Iana-strategy] Pete Resnick's Abstain on charter-ietf-ianaplan-00-04: (with COMMENT)

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Thu, 04 September 2014 04:55 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Original-To: ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDB4F1A0322; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 21:55:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.955
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.955 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.793] autolearn=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 sl1P3uLRJe5D; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 21:55:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 743071A030A; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 21:55:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BE802CCE4; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 07:55:07 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BMf4DII2p-T9; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 07:54:58 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6EAB2CC48; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 07:54:57 +0300 (EEST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D960B205-09B0-4C38-AB38-AE4D63C12C06"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <20140904025929.18297.90860.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 07:54:53 +0300
Message-Id: <116748A8-0D2A-4EF0-98DE-BEACFB68692C@piuha.net>
References: <20140904025929.18297.90860.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/iPifGWcYSN3j7vfzIQa8cJxyVmI
Cc: ianaplan@ietf.org, iana-strategy@i1b.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] [Iana-strategy] Pete Resnick's Abstain on charter-ietf-ianaplan-00-04: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ianaplan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IANA Plan <ianaplan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ianaplan>, <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/>
List-Post: <mailto:ianaplan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan>, <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 04:55:11 -0000

Thanks for your careful (as always) review, Pete :-)

>   The WG will identify, but not create, such required agreements.

Personally, I think that is reasonable. What do others think?

> NEW
>   Fully documenting the interaction between the IETF and the operator
>   of IETF protocol parameters registries may require detailed terms of
>   agreements or other details of procedures that are normally delegated
>   to and handled by the IAB or IAOC. The working group will not attempt
>   to produce or discuss documentation for these details, but will
>   request the IAB or IAOC to provide them, either to be included as an
>   appendix to the WG's output document, or in a separate document
>   provided by the IAB or IAOC.

I’m fine with the rationale for the change and most of your text, but I have trouble understanding the last parts. What if we simply said "…. but will request the IAB or IAOC to provide them separately."?

> I also think the first milestone should be updated similarly to not talk
> in terms of the "proposal”.

Ok.

Jari

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email