IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Iasa20] 6635bis, theory and practice

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 03 May 2019 00:04 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B6DB12001B for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 May 2019 17:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=cZOi7wIz; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=yFDLtoDS
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 fgbugyErFSJy for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 May 2019 17:04:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D6FE12003F for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 May 2019 17:04:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 85726 invoked from network); 3 May 2019 00:04:34 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=14edc.5ccb8592.k1905; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=Z3W8V27oQhS83Rgnze2twNW0byIx4OYtzJrC/LVezw8=; b=cZOi7wIzNb0uhvMWhEJMo4JCdN6MqInXDGB0au0M0KGC9uNNcg33wZ+LO+YNMFW2JypSAkq4sxntdgFBlk0jd85yeHP0jE2FvE9qxPCyw4NVvC5uRxn7IWYFpfboQQSZWOlPvjnHQT7ZVYyQygdg1dY2CNDisQqqfWTbvZ6cu8UOgHKVaaqhk+mTc3MV4JD/ibyWUEeMINUufbzlzoU/WPqKPbW01m2CWj1AJdwGO0mPuJBK+s26Q/skg4y2SPzD
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=14edc.5ccb8592.k1905; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=Z3W8V27oQhS83Rgnze2twNW0byIx4OYtzJrC/LVezw8=; b=yFDLtoDS+3GJpjm/kBmOmP87IohrP7MGhceXBN8UIe5UX22wnYRJpz7J43+3ECW+OCKO1IcBewOyiPfnCSqAFYNqckV/RWK6sN+wPan4qQFICuyC64bCD0PArUdfYLXvqE5p5o/JARD19kqLChd2Ox13rXz6Q3SizrUVHRYYXKlTk7KrmITYficO/8aWlXzmhgTCfQ5sTCyLcUNmPwHiB5DeZMbphzVxxPsmHOJiZ3Nu/eppWQuIM1Vey396/yaP
Received: from ary.qy ([64.246.232.221]) by imap.iecc.com ([64.57.183.75]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP; 03 May 2019 00:04:34 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 3EF17201342884; Thu, 2 May 2019 20:04:33 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 02 May 2019 20:04:33 -0400
Message-Id: <20190503000434.3EF17201342884@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: iasa20@ietf.org
Cc: jmh@joelhalpern.com
In-Reply-To: <7e45df89-f99a-5d90-7e91-cb7514c8c590@joelhalpern.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/0XG9dYMb0NWdMTUB_dkVpfBbQKA>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] 6635bis, theory and practice
X-BeenThere: iasa20@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions relating to reorganising the IETF administrative structures in the so called “IASA 2.0” project. <iasa20.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iasa20/>
List-Post: <mailto:iasa20@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 May 2019 00:04:39 -0000

In article <7e45df89-f99a-5d90-7e91-cb7514c8c590@joelhalpern.com> you write:
>Second, your statement description of the RPC not meeting the SLA in 
>this case seems to be missing the fact that the RSE has told us all many 
>times that the transition work will impact the RPC.  I do not see any 
>kind of failure or mismatch between theory and practice in the current 
>situation.

The SLA has been an issue for a while, predating the IASA20 stuff.

If the RSOC or anyone else wants to propose changes more substantial
than making the LLC responsible for the contract management that the
IAOC (sort of) did, that's fine, but I'm not sure this is the place
for it.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email