Re: [ietf-privacy] PPM Review of RFC 1108

Elwyn Davies <elwynd@folly.org.uk> Thu, 22 May 2014 14:47 UTC

Return-Path: <elwynd@folly.org.uk>
X-Original-To: ietf-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63A891A015C for <ietf-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 May 2014 07:47:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
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 naXc7KJKrHqp for <ietf-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 May 2014 07:46:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a.painless.aa.net.uk (a.painless.aa.net.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:0:30::51bb:1e33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32D6B1A016C for <ietf-privacy@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 May 2014 07:46:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mightyatom.folly.org.uk ([81.187.254.250]) by a.painless.aa.net.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from <elwynd@folly.org.uk>) id 1WnUGW-0007VE-B1; Thu, 22 May 2014 15:46:43 +0100
From: Elwyn Davies <elwynd@folly.org.uk>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <537DC4AE.9010303@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <02e501cf7573$c123ee40$436bcac0$@huitema.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20140521213233.0c503e30@resistor.net> <031901cf7589$479266e0$d6b734a0$@huitema.net> <537DC4AE.9010303@cs.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: Folly Consulting
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 15:46:38 +0100
Message-Id: <1400769998.29419.2718.camel@mightyatom>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-privacy/x_Bd_prYBZ7Xw1lF67rW88sq2Pg
Cc: ietf-privacy@ietf.org, 'S Moonesamy' <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Subject: Re: [ietf-privacy] PPM Review of RFC 1108
X-BeenThere: ietf-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Privacy Discussion List <ietf-privacy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-privacy>, <mailto:ietf-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-privacy/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-privacy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy>, <mailto:ietf-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 14:47:01 -0000

On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 10:34 +0100, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
> On 22/05/14 07:44, Christian Huitema wrote:
> > As I mentioned before, the lottery should only return RFC that are on the
> > standard track and are not obsolete. Otherwise, we are wasting the
> > reviewers' efforts.
.. and I think BCPs.
> 
> Fair point. Also raised by Karen earlier. [1]  If people keep
> using it, I'll add a button for that or something.

Re item 2 on [1]: It would be good to have a 'Clearly nothing to do
button' to save writing trivial reviews (I drew BCP101).

Cheers,
Elwyn

> 
> Cheers,
> S.
> 
> [1] http://down.dsg.cs.tcd.ie/ppm/tweaks.html
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ietf-privacy mailing list
> ietf-privacy@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy