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

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Thu, 05 September 2019 07:42 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.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 54811120801; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 00:42:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.697
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.697 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=bc4KoVW8; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=ZYb/1M0t
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 RHuNKLI-9_om; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 00:42:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DD63120020; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 00:42:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([102.115.148.199]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x857gO1w017061 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 00:42:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1567669358; x=1567755758; bh=Wbg7D5VUP7hxn03ZIBzYlHboDuvMYOQ9d3AZF9XunBI=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=bc4KoVW8gGLs3PBJa4jzpFVBjxgj71Si14t5ZC5zyH5Wk7QN4N5cKQevkFmGDlFXb jdiZ/zxusTJFBjF361W7H7zad95iwGz/kDgvknmMujgMTgbQfsJ9Cqu2JTj/3bjKcf oqa42A4uAUPrjNJY2ly/zwOP84akwkfcc9vg3/vA=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1567669358; x=1567755758; i=@elandsys.com; bh=Wbg7D5VUP7hxn03ZIBzYlHboDuvMYOQ9d3AZF9XunBI=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=ZYb/1M0thBn0lsF2rxSJtNwzviXjfVF+EQNiGf75TQE1F0+WI2asdR/mvK+aFNccj nLZfWCrWSELxqn0dTmUfkncQg2+CeEjx2HnEC5d1bSaxZAXa3qMac0jot4ooJFu6C4 oxqVIq5uMORjegdul3wcCTP0L6HbwaFUCvh/Mu8c=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20190905000050.0b8c5090@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2019 00:38:06 -0700
To: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, iesg@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Cc: jon.peterson@team.neustar, iasa20@ietf.org, iasa2-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7776bis@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <156760606264.22791.12804140363041746046.idtracker@ietfa.am sl.com>
References: <156760606264.22791.12804140363041746046.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/ZOZ6793-kTNrfqb-H6YrnpAnNv4>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] Magnus Westerlund's Discuss on draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7776bis-02: (with DISCUSS)
X-BeenThere: iasa20@ietf.org
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?= <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: Thu, 05 Sep 2019 07:42:47 -0000

Hi Magnus,
At 07:07 AM 04-09-2019, Magnus Westerlund via Datatracker wrote:
>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.

I took a look at draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7776bis-02.  The document is 
equivalent the difference between two text files.  That difference, 
also known as a "patch", is in general not easily understood.

As a comment about procedures, the DISCUSS criteria is not ideally 
suited for non-technical documents.  There was an interesting comment 
[1] during the Last Call.  The comment was likely not addressed as it 
was not listed as an issue.

Several months ago [2], I provided a pointer to the RFC 7776 
procedures.  I'll probably do the same in future, if the need arises, 
as I don't think that a person who is not familiar with the arcanes 
of the IETF would understand this draft.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

1. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/OoEGZvw5Sb1Ngq0FFPVmK4KVwxw
2. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/naVOBpkJw0Ar-J-v55mKgttPKbU