Re: [Iasa20] Odd deprecations in draft-ietf-iasa2-consolidated-upd-05

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Mon, 04 March 2019 21:04 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.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 746BD131050 for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Mar 2019 13:04:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 MzEGyMvPdI8V for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Mar 2019 13:04:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E241130EA8 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Mar 2019 13:04:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1h0ulA-000Lle-QG; Mon, 04 Mar 2019 16:04:28 -0500
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2019 16:04:23 -0500
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
cc: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com>, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, IASA 2 WG <iasa20@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <58B9A69BF24CBD03C6D6FDB7@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <4F62E491-CE40-4819-923F-72B7F3DA0C41@cooperw.in>
References: <1b58312a-ab8e-ccba-2f9b-884091e1c603@nostrum.com> <27724fb0-25ee-0226-b2ee-2b861a34cbf2@gmail.com> <CFBA6F06-E1A6-4974-9BA0-5DCC1CCCA7AE@vigilsec.com> <AF40B5B2002AE7A55B489999@PSB> <051B5D57-4B47-4D29-83CB-9AA3B3E3A6DE@vigilsec.com> <96A8294B81742974985BE7C8@PSB> <17AB2523-CEB6-4464-8BED-E6B99AFE39A5@rfc-editor.org> <43379A25-D14D-413C-B940-9D135B128724@cable.comcast.com> <2E93E49C-E201-4EDC-91A7-544AFD40FB62@cisco.com> <D110E3546D6957A6CAB14502@PSB> <9A20C483-AE4D-45FB-89D3-C331329AE689@cisco.com> <4F62E491-CE40-4819-923F-72B7F3DA0C41@cooperw.in>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/e2Iwqjt2rIJSCnFEQEIdc3xeQUo>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] Odd deprecations in draft-ietf-iasa2-consolidated-upd-05
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: Mon, 04 Mar 2019 21:04:37 -0000

Alissa,

Excellent.   Do you (and/or Ted if he is reading this) have any
preference as to whether I post a new draft in the next several
hours with an appropriate note to the RFC Editor or just wait
until Thursday in the hope of an IAB action and specific
instructions about what text to put in?   It makes little
difference to me; I'd prefer to do whatever is easiest for the
others (IESG, IAB, RFC Editor) involved.

best,
   john


--On Monday, March 4, 2019 15:38 -0500 Alissa Cooper
<alissa@cooperw.in> wrote:

> I have asked to add this to the agenda for the IAB call on
> Wednesday, March 6.
> 
> Alissa
> 
>> On Mar 2, 2019, at 1:39 PM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 2 Mar 2019, at 18:22, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Eliot and IAB members who are following this,
>>> 
>>> If the IAB is willing to commit to that RSN, I'll fix the
>>> document accordingly.
>> 
>> I think this way is simpler and cleaner.
>> 
>>> I'd prefer to not hold up IESG review on
>>> this matter or to find time to generate extra drafts so, if a
>>> quick IAB commitment is not possible, I suggest I fix the
>>> document as Heather and Jason have suggested but encourage
>>> the RFC Editor to treat the comment about IAB action as if
>>> it were a normative reference, i.e., assuming the IESG
>>> actually approves this I-D for publication, they don't
>>> actually publish until the IAB's preferences are clear and
>>> then, if necessary, we do a touch-up on the document during
>>> AUTH48 with confidence that the WG's intent is perfectly
>>> clear.
>> 
>> Yeah, if the RFC Editor doesn't mind, you can put text in
>> like, [Note to RFC Editor: IAB to fill in their statement
>> here.]
>> 
>> I also realize that I shouldn't have proposed specific
>> text. That was a bit forward of me.  The IAB should just
>> consider that a sample that could get the job done.
>> 
>>> 
>>> Does that work for everyone?
>> 
>> WFM, noting above.
>> 
>> Eliot
>> _______________________________________________
>> iasa20 mailing list
>> iasa20@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20
>