IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Iasa20] 6635bis

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Sat, 27 April 2019 00:34 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 F15EC120125 for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 17:34:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=YcEFYKfs; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=nvZchetU
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 iOX82Ze40BDw for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 17:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 247DD12009A for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 17:34:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 66561 invoked from network); 27 Apr 2019 00:34:38 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=103ff.5cc3a39e.k1904; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=QpFO2KzJKe+LRX1oedvLm5PpvYjaKExq8CYTN4pbCv0=; b=YcEFYKfs8DHaiLDjBqlfs7C7XShEKTl+W4Of3eHtJwtXxDyfkLrRP4H+MbRHKwlWsS216A5w4Ps4aCNnjv+/K9AGysIJGfYWjkL5um7H4A9d7BnUpluNEhYCcCC9alBGgE2c/rwYexjyPZ9lr2FNwIRy/UaChj+t2f1fsbAOCA1CMJccuaVWZEvxnqvJGFpFL6uYyz8WW2ocpd2t37TbeDz+jmNA51Mz0qJuKaCMDzyO3iRKWwjsjIPD3ELE1nvC
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=103ff.5cc3a39e.k1904; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=QpFO2KzJKe+LRX1oedvLm5PpvYjaKExq8CYTN4pbCv0=; b=nvZchetUs1ZeD2B9g+pZ7hRr+Ud8QF1xIymLvguiTo582u39fk6p3Oyq+nOUgvqjSogh5yqLnr4Tqwlsg6TACHIyz6Y1NwSupGeuKVVWLd3BCR8ZlWq/6ByPgbLa2eqHlXaopPKkgVjNwZoP/tZz92W9NvfyCJjD+I7d3d/JdYlDx375oNRByw1zTzM7cvlkgE4FalJTqioc0cdb0hkFmNSYXfxIEUtyzIAdNH9+AmSa4ospoVdMQaygCqq2rYgM
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP6; 27 Apr 2019 00:34:38 -0000
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 20:34:37 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1904262033390.29815@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Cc: iasa20@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <c2a25515-b5cc-13f9-cdf9-058170194d1f@joelhalpern.com>
References: <20190426211900.555852012FE081@ary.qy> <22f00e3c-faa1-2eb3-ad38-97f6fb743aac@joelhalpern.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1904261835490.29589@ary.qy> <c2a25515-b5cc-13f9-cdf9-058170194d1f@joelhalpern.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (OSX 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/hJMAsGrXF9yVhvhxMxJfuJ4lkwI>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] 6635bis
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: Sat, 27 Apr 2019 00:34:44 -0000

> As far as I can tell, the change you propose is not necessary to get the LLC 
> working.  This working group was specifically chartered NOT to change any 
> policies.  The change you (and Sean if I understand properly) are proposing 
> represents a change in policy.
>
> Yes, I disagree with the change in policy.  I think it would be a mistake.

I don't think it's a change in policy and I think we're making a classic 
IETF overspecification mistake not to let the LLC run its own business.

But I don't seem to be in the majority here.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email