Re: [Iasa20] Ballot positions on draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7437bis

Bob Hinden <> Sun, 07 July 2019 17:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13DEF12004D; Sun, 7 Jul 2019 10:08:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1Z02EAAZAfib; Sun, 7 Jul 2019 10:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::429]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7DFE12000F; Sun, 7 Jul 2019 10:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id y4so5943573wrm.2; Sun, 07 Jul 2019 10:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=OqSeAkBhJVaPcVlJeguz/XrqYMQSr4eZ0pRvrko47Kk=; b=ABoYhCc7hWw989akB+sEtcJgS2V4bdFx2T36QAZLwOJN/HMFQ0VEuFgumqkdSl9Vpk OuxzeFPYnzhWrHQYeBhpCl32guKeJrPaQHUdpIKnxbbgkpfI2grMvOh5KEu4H2uYku7l vhpTwJf3TunYPLW8adTSCNJRGd9aUTq1lKw2NS5o0+saMnGuAHrIAYcs+9RLyLExBpyJ D6fMxn+mwfEealDHXiaLlAp/qQn0i+KoFnxtXKXg+F/Rvf1XGE6FozSrBQzREBG/VlPv WiOoL+cyA/ZneRaNLp27spS4wh0oIRy0+dJMJGBTuNq4l1kBkLQqWr4hHmTvaK0qxTbB cVIQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=OqSeAkBhJVaPcVlJeguz/XrqYMQSr4eZ0pRvrko47Kk=; b=rbIHFTlRQN8dov7++qeXAq2xV7olU07dWol2tSZw1Wi+zFr3bY+tvhkUrxXfz8MJDj dS1SroamwQQYndLAMjglhaN5kyyz9d2OeiVxDQpTEH54NVgzphZs2MpYyLiRejnFZwSN ZRkpH1HmoZ5AGBl89CYz9vQRPDHJG7I4EZfoMOWWhdPXLRX3U3YJj6yFnshXLAAcpJw2 xiiLh5h5heSIHeBA8S+07+gtfnGDInaOoNb3ZE176AkJ2LCPTRGrYNoV9t2osMEm3k5Q 9GI+CCe1zomuQaUEOvGBNpVNnn0E588FqXzbHPvRjb73P4Ysu5tm9U5mVDSd42fZNWk0 mOAw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU8+GhYDHyDM1sL3zs4PEHV6+w9hJSAf/LCghGz6f05KpasinFE XgLFefaqHtgRxWXP3pNdSFg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwVDdHABF5hIlPmyduWnoTu5ttcCO2AoVT5V4tprwgOauvZnFkNTafNlEJJ8s8pMIuVLxWwSQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:52c7:: with SMTP id r7mr13721010wrv.83.1562519287475; Sun, 07 Jul 2019 10:08:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:ef0b:7156:c06c:df94:4f8a? ([2601:647:5a00:ef0b:7156:c06c:df94:4f8a]) by with ESMTPSA id q7sm13938020wrx.6.2019. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 07 Jul 2019 10:08:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Hinden <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A46A9FE8-1576-422B-A6AE-84AB89056447"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2019 10:08:01 -0700
In-Reply-To: <>
Cc: Bob Hinden <>, Warren Kumari <>, Stephen Farrell <>, Alissa Cooper <>, IASA 2 WG <>, Brian Carpenter <>, IESG <>
To: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] Ballot positions on draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7437bis
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: =?iso-8859-1?q?Discussions_relating_to_reorganising_the_IETF_administrative_structures_in_the_so_called_=93IASA_2=2E0=94_project=2E?= <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2019 17:08:11 -0000


> On Jul 7, 2019, at 9:46 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <> wrote:
> [Clearing all previous comments as they are not really relevant to the text below]
> Alissa, thank you for framing the discussion. I now understand Bob's reply to my COMMENTs "out of scope" that I failed to understand to be honest.
> While I now understand that we need to "upgrade" RFC 7437 as soon as possible to accommodate the new structure; I share Warren's concerns: I am not comfortable of saying "no objection" with COMMENTs that won't be addressed at all (not to mention some DISCUSSs).
> If everyone thinks that:
> 1) let's deliver ASAP RFC7437bis with a "simple relifting" to accommodate the new structure
> 2) later let's redo it with a more refined content
> Then, I have no problem EXCEPT that the following sentence is rather vague, not binding and not very visible (esp for a BCP):
>   "This revision addresses only the changes required for IASA 2.0;
>   should the community agree on other changes, they will be addressed
>   in future documents."
> I would strongly prefer a clear hint / requirement to have more work to be done on RFC 7437ter or at least having this 'limited scope' in the front abstract.

I think adding text to the abstract is fine.  How about something like this:

   The process by which the members of the IAB and IESG, some Trustees
   of the IETF Trust, and some Directors of the IETF LLC are selected,
   confirmed, and recalled is specified in this document.  This document
   is based on RFC3777 and RFC7437 and has been updated to only reflect the
   changes introduced by IASA 2.0.  Any other changes will be addressed in
   future documents.

BTW, if we do an RFC7437bisbis, I am willing to be the document editor.


> Regards and thanks to the authors & WG participants,
> -éric