Re: [Iasa20] WGLC: RFC 7776-bis (oops)

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 01 April 2019 12:53 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
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 DED5612010E for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 05:53:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 BpHBtYChq-Zp for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 05:53:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta7.iomartmail.com (mta7.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.157]) (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 461A61200A1 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 05:53:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs2.iomartmail.com (vs2.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.123]) by mta7.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x31CrUiw013814; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 13:53:30 +0100
Received: from vs2.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDFAD22048; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 13:53:29 +0100 (BST)
Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.224]) by vs2.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7A7A22044; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 13:53:29 +0100 (BST)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ([147.83.201.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x31CrSrV002718 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 1 Apr 2019 13:53:29 +0100
Reply-To: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "'Brian Haberman'" <brian@innovationslab.net>, <iasa20@ietf.org>
References: <62B627AB-6DB2-4697-A049-A79C02A25A41@cable.comcast.com> <2FDAF1AD-F6FF-4D92-A094-96EB841C14D2@sn3rd.com> <EC7A0AF5-A042-4E7A-98EE-4FD6EE705822@gmail.com> <118a01d4e732$34730040$9d5900c0$@olddog.co.uk> <ed2c6b92-037c-427e-e9b0-cb75f117e34f@innovationslab.net>
In-Reply-To: <ed2c6b92-037c-427e-e9b0-cb75f117e34f@innovationslab.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 13:53:27 +0100
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <014201d4e889$e7666cc0$b6334640$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQL8ONJunUay5avi+MspgHTZfvOxjALISYKBASWM7u4Cb3d3WgDVEafXo58OreA=
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Originating-IP: 147.83.201.128
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.0.1013-24524.007
X-TM-AS-Result: No--7.879-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--7.879-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.1013-24524.007
X-TMASE-Result: 10--7.878800-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: eVEkOcJu0F7xIbpQ8BhdbMH0JgP/bKWSStGAgmKqWuWGfZtsjmOhRYGs GRElTCbgDw+N5oohBVbtnMrhTgvwtJo6VjdbE6fnlTsGW3DmpUvjAcZeNJgY9yIWzbRXGr/CuZE t0lV0Sb+MFlICVmz/6uHOHmbNVg++SSQ7jOqms06KQCqq8vYqFcWmFF22SfTehWdOaWKi6Cm8xJ mJORcY9IPXhbfY+pbswNB5/Krjkn3REKzvS64+oce31VQ+6yRGfkuZtv/FS5pG5JgptSbJa8wkV LgvGIiLXQS0szagh4OsPt5gvTNUSARb1Jm2KWH77TLIvnWov9HDHSNFHFxB84f088N+kzol5gHc 4CzCE7mokhRcXx575zKHYLsR4q0Lv1l2Uvx6idpTptoDfp6JrMRB0bsfrpPIfiAqrjYtFiToTZ0 nm5see9g9xvKOJTSBqswbSAhbjKMJ18/x+IYPMH7cGd19dSFd
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/lgiLyOQFDW1qsmU0IKNQYK5rIbs>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] WGLC: RFC 7776-bis (oops)
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: Mon, 01 Apr 2019 12:53:35 -0000

Yes, Brian, I agree.

My joy (which I will resolve!) is that 7776bis is an update (just pointing at bits of text to be replaced) while 7437bis is a full replacement.

It is quite ugly to remove text that said "updates" and replace it with pointers. But *everything* is possible.

Adrian


-----Original Message-----
From: iasa20 <iasa20-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Brian Haberman
Sent: 01 April 2019 13:49
To: iasa20@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] WGLC: RFC 7776-bis (oops)

Hi Adrian,

On 3/30/19 3:53 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> Well, we can do this.
> It is a bit ugly because 7776 updates 7437.
> So what we end up with is an I-D going into the RFC Editor Queue with a planned update to an I-D going into the RFC Editor Queue at the same time.
> 
> Just as a reminder, while 7437bis is a full replacement for (i.e., obsoletes) 7437, 7776bis is only a minor delta (i.e., updates) 7776.
> 
> I completely understand the notion of "this document is only open to make the IASA2.0 changes" but maybe this could be cleaner?
>  
> I will update my working copy of 7776bis to show the update to the work in progress, but if you or the WG prefer that we clean this up, I am happy to discuss doing different.
> 

While I am replying to this note, I have read the later replies and this
text seems the most logical to respond to...

I would support having 7437bis take on the responsibility of fixing the
text that 7776bis is currently trying to fix in 7437. It is silly to
have an active -bis document updating another active -bis document. The
gyrations needed to follow that logic will make it extremely difficult
for any new reader of those documents to follow along.

Let's do the right thing here.

Regards,
Brian