Re: [Iasa20] Magnus Westerlund's Discuss on draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7776bis-02: (with DISCUSS)

["Adrian Farrel" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Magnus,

Not sure how the authors can address your Discuss.

We were tasked by the WG to produce this document in this form and specifically to not open the existing document even for restrained edits. I think this arose because the WG interpreted its charter very strictly and did not want to risk any other change sneaking in.

It would, of course, be basically simply editorial to revise 7776 and, since that was an AD sponsored piece of work, we could do that instead or as well.

I'm sure the editors remain at the service of the community, but it would be nice to not have to do the work twice.

Best,
Adrian

-----Original Message-----
From: Magnus Westerlund via Datatracker <[e-mail]> 
Sent: 04 September 2019 15:08
To: The IESG <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; Jon Peterson <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Magnus Westerlund's Discuss on draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7776bis-02: (with DISCUSS)

Magnus Westerlund has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7776bis-02: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7776bis/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't understand why not a replacement for RFC7776 was produced instead of
this soup that is not readable. Publishing this in this form is providing very
mixed messages to the community where we (IESG) apparently are aiming for
readability and ease of comparing older and newer documents, but can't be
bothered to ensure that is produced when it comes to the process documents.
Also RFC 7776 appears to be very self contained and with removal of content
that will be even more true.