IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Iasa20] 6635bis

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 26 April 2019 22:39 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 E97631200E9 for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 15:39:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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=IoLWaZOc; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=FvVAfk4l
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 JNOiHdTWkXFo for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 15:39:19 -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 C126812006F for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 15:39:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 31278 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2019 22:39:16 -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=7a2c.5cc38894.k1904; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=9DNMRE8N7yfW4AlnZos5ZE4nFSgr7Uyjrs+p4RM9baE=; b=IoLWaZOcVaX2GikF90XOC13FYLyMYG6DgJMUcawmuMLv8OnZbQFtMuPzyHWsTy6G3ZnfMvIeQHsOWwTsGbwy+JiETaBvGQNwgVdqTuxYSWczk4vTVN6uXddQBCHRVhT7zN6XpVKGW5tlWI5KH/RXpxPs5yY5RFNdC4cT4MFxrnE2yEafUzqS74kYX2PlJmJxfh2jk9QIjVHuCXBShqP285JOeSJzR+bE+Af36FB4v56mNPvkdJ2eSl4Ut1F2lrrW
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=7a2c.5cc38894.k1904; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=9DNMRE8N7yfW4AlnZos5ZE4nFSgr7Uyjrs+p4RM9baE=; b=FvVAfk4l1Pdk7DVmnUtt22e16z6sVg16VaGM128NYaMx3NcGzAZVbopjjZxHo6Jonyf8ncsdvPHnv7i9cAiOukaA/34ZqVdhNw1s4OIDmKXzzRSfonBnKaQa3iNlR2vJK6fn4nMnhHD5QgWlPB0WRlfdi0kS0Uguf/2divDUp2y7YiwVCBBAp1G0S8gtwjVMb4uipEGqS29zo8jcifk5Dh8TWTvweUi7/Mmdnjjp0XgsqUEAKxaT+vH5d9qP40fu
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; 26 Apr 2019 22:39:16 -0000
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 18:39:16 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1904261835490.29589@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Cc: iasa20@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <22f00e3c-faa1-2eb3-ad38-97f6fb743aac@joelhalpern.com>
References: <20190426211900.555852012FE081@ary.qy> <22f00e3c-faa1-2eb3-ad38-97f6fb743aac@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/sc8VI-cbxz0PI_lU3tQyWifPB5c>
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: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 22:39:21 -0000

> What I fail to see is why there is any need to change the wording that we 
> have on the status of the RSE.  I can imagine that the LLC will need to 
> continue to exercise care in the handling of the RSE to avoid accidental 
> changes of status.  As you say John, it is tricky.
> But I do not see why that should result in any change to the text in the 
> revision of RFC 6635.

Assuming we agree that the details of the agreement with the RSE are up to 
the LLC, I agree.

But RFC 6635 says "The RFC Production Center function is performed by a 
paid contractor," and " The RFC Production Center contractor is to be 
selected through an IASA Request for Proposal (RFP) process as described 
in Section 4.1." and " The RFC Publisher contractor is to be selected 
through an IASA RFP process as described in Section 4.1."

I think the current RFC people are doing a swell job but I would like us 
to give the LLC the latitude to structure things however makes sense.  At 
this point, we have a contractor which hires its staff but at some point 
it might make sense for the LLC to hire staff without an intermediary.

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