Re: [Iasa20] Terminology issue in mtgvenue
"Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com> Fri, 19 October 2018 21:51 UTC
Return-Path: <Jason_Livingood@comcast.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 D64B8130E10; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 14:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 ooTAkk3AI8au; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 14:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from copdcmhout02.cable.comcast.com (copdcmhout02.cable.comcast.com [96.114.158.212]) (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 C5575130DF4; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 14:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 60729ed4-1a5ff7000000546c-63-5bca51f612fa
Received: from copdcexc33.cable.comcast.com (copdcmhoutvip.cable.comcast.com [96.114.156.147]) (using TLS with cipher AES256-SHA256 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by copdcmhout02.cable.comcast.com (SMTP Gateway) with SMTP id 44.F0.21612.6F15ACB5; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 15:51:50 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from COPDCEXC37.cable.comcast.com (147.191.125.136) by copdcexc33.cable.comcast.com (147.191.125.132) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1466.3; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 17:51:46 -0400
Received: from COPDCEXC37.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::3aea:a7ff:fe36:8a94]) by COPDCEXC37.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::3aea:a7ff:fe36:8a94%15]) with mapi id 15.01.1466.009; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 17:51:46 -0400
From: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com>
To: Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net>, "iasa20@ietf.org" <iasa20@ietf.org>
CC: "mtgvenue@ietf.org" <mtgvenue@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Iasa20] Terminology issue in mtgvenue
Thread-Index: AQHUZ/QXc7qoE3XtS06NT/slCjIe/qUnG/QA
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 21:51:46 +0000
Message-ID: <5D35E1D4-220A-41F7-B552-61D0C5586A2B@cable.comcast.com>
References: <8F025819-6D43-4D09-858E-0866532FEBDC@episteme.net>
In-Reply-To: <8F025819-6D43-4D09-858E-0866532FEBDC@episteme.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.10.3.181015
x-originating-ip: [68.87.29.8]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <07C278DE920A2444991A86E01F6A7878@comcast.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Forward
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrLKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsWSUDRnsu63wFPRBquWy1ksmb6RyWLp4T8s Frs/rGd1YPZ4cmsJs8eSJT+ZApiiGhhtSjKKUhNLXFLTUvOKU+24FDCATVJqWn5RqmtiUU5l UGpOaiJ2ZSCVKak5mWWpRfpYjdHHak5CF1PG/HWHmQoWyFc823OWvYFxh1wXIyeHhICJxLTu rWxdjFwcQgK7mCR+X+iEclqYJHZ3TmCBcE4zSpxde5QRpIVNwEzi7sIrzCC2iICPxLfzd8Fs ZgFtiRUrJrCC2MICxhLr2nYD1XMA1ZhIfH1uBlFuJHFlfwMLiM0ioCrxdMcJJhCbV8BF4uTl xWDjhQTsJbbeXA8W5xRwkNi34TMbiM0oICbx/dQaJohV4hK3nsxngvhAQGLJnvPMELaoxMvH /8BOEBXQl9g94TgjRFxOomdHK9g5zAKaEut36UOMsZJ4cGQ21EhFiSndD9khzhGUODnzCQtE q7jE4SM7WCcwSs5CsnkWwqRZSCbNQjJpFpJJCxhZVzHyWZrpGRqa6BmaWugZGRptYgQnonlX djBenu5xiFGAg1GJh/cZ16loIdbEsuLK3EOMEhzMSiK8iqUno4V4UxIrq1KL8uOLSnNSiw8x SnOwKInzFhsAVQukJ5akZqemFqQWwWSZODilGhj59c/8nf6H+4V9YfFp36ieJ9LTZapmbrLn qCzdyK994/Gyo36/Cpm+bngS5jD9h1d+1Ef+CyIfj6kaHTi2prTYddEFS8cPZRt/iz510bm6 eG+O9tXOxBm+C89oxceX/8h5JnLvyOuiZ463eb2/vyn67C9mumalaKFBt75oHOuCUtYfEyx2 FM5VYinOSDTUYi4qTgQAmCtxH0ADAAA=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/bY3YYcnbEg4xIJwbVviWBAQdH_E>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] Terminology issue in mtgvenue
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, 19 Oct 2018 21:51:51 -0000
Thanks for this heads-up, Pete! We in the IASA2 WG will put this in our work queue. I will take a look as co-chair early next week and try to actively start up list discussion on the details. Jason On 10/19/18, 5:38 PM, "iasa20 on behalf of Pete Resnick" <iasa20-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of resnick@episteme.net> wrote: IASA 2.0 folks: With my mtgvenue chair hat on: An issue has come up over in mtgvenue that I think really needs to be resolved by iasa20, and in particular not by the mtgvenue folks alone. The Venue Selection document, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process/>, refers to "IASA" throughout. When written, the document presumed that we were working under IASA 1.0, and had references to RFC 4071. When our documents got to AUTH48, we realized that it was going to come out right on the heels of the IASA 2.0 docs and that it would be silly to publish only to have to turn around and fix things. The initial suggestion in mtgvenue was to pretty much do a global replace of "IASA" with "IETF LLC" (with some other editorial changes). The document editor's version with those edits is here: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc8491-auth48diff.html>. However, a few folks (and in particular, folks who are active in iasa20) noted that in fact "IASA" was correct, because under IASA 2.0, the LLC is under IASA, and that using "LLC" might be incorrect in some instances. Conversely, some folks thought that "LLC" was a clearer reference. As that discussion has evolved, your faithful mtgvenue chair is no longer sure that we've gotten this exactly right. On top of that, Alissa has indicated that it's probably better to have iasa20 figure out what terminology is appropriate to refer to the assorted entities, for the sake of all documents, not just mtgvenue's. So, I would ask that the iasa20 WG review the above two documents and let us know whether we've got it right or wrong, and generally let us know which terminology should be used in which circumstances. I'm sure mtgvenue folks will pipe up with their concerns, but guidance should really be coming from a discussion in iasa20. BTW: Don't worry about the fact that the document is in AUTH48 or whether it will need a new Last Call or whatever. Let's get the document correct first, and then we'll figure out what process knobs, lights, and buttons need to be operated. Cheers, pr -- Pete Resnick http://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best _______________________________________________ iasa20 mailing list iasa20@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20
- [Iasa20] Terminology issue in mtgvenue Pete Resnick
- Re: [Iasa20] Terminology issue in mtgvenue Livingood, Jason
- Re: [Iasa20] Terminology issue in mtgvenue Alissa Cooper
- Re: [Iasa20] Terminology issue in mtgvenue Livingood, Jason
- Re: [Iasa20] [Mtgvenue] Terminology issue in mtgv… Eliot Lear