Re: [Idr] Working group adoption call for draft-snijders-idr-deprecate-30-31-129

Job Snijders <job@instituut.net> Wed, 02 November 2016 13:03 UTC

Return-Path: <job@instituut.net>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C6061295D5 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 06:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=instituut-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 XQX6V1X2AGF1 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 06:03:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22c.google.com (mail-wm0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C55F6129625 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 06:03:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id a197so139455521wmd.0 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 02 Nov 2016 06:03:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=instituut-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=+P553QjvYaGQHfJb1JQljzllhMzgRpWVrXhrIcYHags=; b=XkDNbB7QxsP27SghQuLHifn8+xL0f8RPJLjRI2CxtfZGahb5WK+d2RrUqv7M30trIN 3c5QITJ6kX9lnDWyi83tt+Ac1+T3drpUouy0kJqx5uY1XlESsUsM6HFl2uY8mIwNEOYe +mUaPmkCNxMb57K4w2hcNG3PvQjdws9mlDI4FMo0oH3VrCZdTmOymLVe8xymH+gd60Fs ItJDSC/8PSfOZ1yuW0fis27rvgihpyUmI1RZtUVRYJDoDx8/jzbH9WqEl6hZ+PH1wOL+ I9xVVJflkmtQHkhz8RfwqsYJEfz3zi+HFy1Z4jrXEllHeldlP3ZnDd2rnOoTy8nl4gAf 52HQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=+P553QjvYaGQHfJb1JQljzllhMzgRpWVrXhrIcYHags=; b=aawBiFiSX5ymmSmrSrqSFuW6S61relKXP6Y6pwcrrZueCNlTwVaz8j2Tih1e0SkEz7 g51FuZ3DrlXD7bsXgoTUE9Et320bJAr/eFISNQlYb2HAmHq3CaMeJ/h3G3Skl7h6twlV /jbl2dOySmTHtzW8nJ8+PYQgFyBhi26x1/wHURu56gVRSz+M1YLUIWdpaIDuqKJi6QNX B76CZSTqAq9gNOl3uucvLcqlD7T1rIH5B943iCIdqaKJucskfHb2aHowBRmODOn+vr3b fiU2gVLGbpANPwnU6VqG8JSDd2jSq+Ft3j9paH8Xkh1iwPohwvB9NxRHcgASGA6bbVIt GAjQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvdFz+T/cLsdxyo0pKEAw64jv88Qrh6Le/0/RqYiOHtNB+z7LVWZ/wNnZp00xEpuhQ==
X-Received: by 10.28.150.134 with SMTP id y128mr3149526wmd.6.1478091822151; Wed, 02 Nov 2016 06:03:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([31.161.139.170]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id im3sm2673640wjb.13.2016.11.02.06.03.40 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 02 Nov 2016 06:03:41 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 14:03:39 +0100
From: Job Snijders <job@instituut.net>
To: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <20161102130339.GA952@Vurt.local>
References: <169A4C1A-302E-4FE0-841A-ADA63E812E1F@juniper.net> <20161101144036.GB10519@pfrc.org> <F744170E-172A-40E6-98EF-2A7BF6BF9DE1@juniper.net> <25D24BDC-5322-4B19-A971-9FDD65C07BF1@juniper.net> <01c101d23467$9c8b0cc0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <4070F36C-3D40-4EE8-B6F0-D077DB18875A@juniper.net> <025801d234f4$78232740$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <20161102103746.GT79185@Space.Net> <20161102112754.GM1581@hanna.meerval.net> <008b01d23507$8f17a3a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <008b01d23507$8f17a3a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/FVf_ZtPO84EmEFmd0EO6nTUoOxc>
Cc: IETF IDR Working Group <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Working group adoption call for draft-snijders-idr-deprecate-30-31-129
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2016 13:03:46 -0000

On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 12:48:34PM +0000, t.petch wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Job Snijders" <job@instituut.net>
> To: "Gert Doering" <gert@space.net>
> Cc: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>om>; "IETF IDR Working Group"
> <idr@ietf.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2016 11:27 AM
> > On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 11:37:46AM +0100, Gert Doering wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 10:32:45AM +0000, t.petch wrote:
> > > > So we have a definition that has been in use for three years, in
> the
> > > > context of IANA, which is, to quote,
> > > > "  Specific entries in a registry can be marked as "obsolete" (no
> longer
> > > >    in use) or "deprecated" (use is not recommended). "
> > > >
> > > > I believe that this I-D cannot be understood without reference to
> that
> > > > definition, hence my opposition to an I-D that leaves the
> interpretation
> > > > of 'deprecated' up to the reader (who may assume that the SMI
> definition
> > > > is appropriate).
> > >
> > > So what you're saying is "add a link to that reference, and all is
> good"?
> > >
> > > Why is that interfering with draft *adoption*?  Sounds more like
> wordsmithing
> > > for the then-WG document before WGLC to me, not a fundamental reason
> to not
> > > accept the draft.
> >
> > No, it appears that Tom is saying that IDR cannot deprecate codepoints
> > until IETF/IANA have developed a deeper understanding of the word
> > "deprecate".
> 
> Job, Gert
> 
> I think that that may go beyond what I have said.
> 
> If draft leiba-cotton becomes an RFC soon, then a Normative Reference to
> that would be my preferred option, so that IDR is on the same page as
> IANA and the rest of the IETF.  Note the leiba-cotton is in state IESG
> Evaluation AD follow up for 163 days with Pete Resnick holding a DISCUSS
> and Terry Manderson as AD so it is Pete (or Terry) you need to light a
> fire under.
> 
> I did however mention another possibility in my first post, of putting
> in our own definition so that it is clear what is intended (if only to
> those wishing to adopt the I-D).  Given 20 years of (different) usage in
> SMI, which some readers will be familiar with, I think we need a
> definition so include one!  We could just lift the existing text from
> leiba-cotton then, if that does not change between now and whenever
> leiba-cotton becomes an RFC, we will be in line with them - which is
> good.
> 
> I think that IETF/IANA developed all the understanding that is needed of
> the meaning of 'deprecated' in 2013 and all we have to do now is to use
> that understanding.

Thanks for your feedback, I'll respin the draft into a -02 version based
on this discussion and submit it later today.

Kind regards,

Job