IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: fundamental brokenness of iasa2 updates (was Re: [Iasa20] draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc2418bis-01.txt)

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Tue, 23 October 2018 15:39 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0209812EB11; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 08:39:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 rwokC4E581fp; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 08:39:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x531.google.com (mail-pg1-x531.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::531]) (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 DE413124408; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 08:39:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x531.google.com with SMTP id c10-v6so842541pgq.4; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 08:39:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=Ma88aYmnHWft4p311lK4XkH+xrb+eERLK51LgtqizdM=; b=gKwTC5rqpKzJIKJjQDutMJltSGajHzihZKWda5zBWrAVLmzOHxtR1fgE0hbOTB8FMN QJNo+e91DfWofBBZJjc7a/recSQSjNHIdZOb/OPSuOPK8KqwgKQNcPP9Q4TStrho9K5I lUWHxOknxVSL6Jz5ZoNupp1d7uubQAnFpunPo4Xvs3rFZCdWASer+CtF0hEaiImxBN7Q ANhpsAHmJ9mN6VK9+4n3TTc13WWKps4LEtOuo+M45iLIK3+V8ocNuNQwvHoYLiCxD7sH Km49KLwxw+GsPJNeZGrLTokDPiw8WLhEnU7rxjBN+MjOSE1z8vnMFjKSlosp8oZqz4lg KVcg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=Ma88aYmnHWft4p311lK4XkH+xrb+eERLK51LgtqizdM=; b=FdbAL2CzuNh8kRR5otEsR0xqK3ujU8AEfxDxOTF841Mrit/ZtRxcJcCLMtcL21mVcz bWvugAmgEPP2zY2tcsZOGRRxiQ82oVQvHkimd7T0IHsRyrTn8EpgemdEfF8VkzOr6w3A bZ1CkTqORAKxE2AmLMX4wI/XyxTZOcW33bWEkZJKnCjSB/GPAIArLliJvkiWMcu/IqpN SinKTB8ChYRI0s/f/WAqNVk7aPp+ty0/wiCnbPKzpkP/mZIDme2GjZKGe/y1xSQR4qtq 5AHxkBcUsujiq5SwrBQxx7Z/p+vgyCdFltSSw0DheFRokFuEWLVtFNlyLnHFGAPdWPHU cu+g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfohcy/2KY8F+NvUpIJNDrL4lp3wuOB1s/rQgj+PPqO089Uz0M7nb 7lbIa1txZec9ydt7NXCHk+8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV61+RNJsqPZnA5rfcAQPPd/TyiEPtc2kvfFu0vr5GUnbIsMC823xCftYreoP3sjHU/NgRiOSyg==
X-Received: by 2002:a62:b209:: with SMTP id x9-v6mr51422794pfe.148.1540309149297; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 08:39:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:4d01:f3a:d565:51a6:7b5f:d591? ([2601:647:4d01:f3a:d565:51a6:7b5f:d591]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s85-v6sm4398237pfi.15.2018.10.23.08.39.08 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 23 Oct 2018 08:39:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <7280B713-3D48-4DB9-B6CA-C2761EC419B4@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F4CF372F-840A-4BA5-BEEF-E480D9A48B8F"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Subject: Re: fundamental brokenness of iasa2 updates (was Re: [Iasa20] draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc2418bis-01.txt)
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 08:39:07 -0700
In-Reply-To: <313EA233-92B1-4D61-AECA-099ADEECD063@sobco.com>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>, IASA 2 WG <iasa20@ietf.org>
To: Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com>
References: <4915CD062D28D607D3D4AD44@PSB> <8906b727-f9c3-e7e1-164b-f7b88e48e74b@gmail.com> <1C77C07809EFB402E3E10907@PSB> <DE6E9C0D-C46B-4010-9E6D-8438DE687275@sobco.com> <2A42A5D2-9785-4350-92A5-0FDFD54AD17F@cable.comcast.com> <9A5B610BA33D4336A91409DA@PSB> <CABtrr-UdUaZpoy8JroUL8oNkibc=F8hJ1ksnmvar0a1x3VCNrQ@mail.gmail.com> <541E68A8540C1AB8D39A96E4@PSB> <313EA233-92B1-4D61-AECA-099ADEECD063@sobco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/0Uu81cG7pCfym35mv3rB8MDCcyI>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 15:39:12 -0000

Scott,

> On Oct 22, 2018, at 2:08 PM, Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com> wrote:
> 
> this is a separate issue about the iasa2 proposed updates
> 
> come on - you update an RFC without including a section that says what changes you are making???

I agree, a documents that updates another RFC should be very clear about what is being updated.  For example, RFC 8318 is very clear what it was updating in RFC7437, see Section 3.1.   This was very helpful in working on RFC7437bis.

> 
> are you purposely trying to make it harder for IETF participants to understand what’s going on?

I don’t think anyone is trying to do this.  I think "Hanlon's razor” applies here :-)

Bob



> 
> every RFC that updates another RFC needs (MUST?) have a section that tells the reader what has
> changed - this is vital for any technical speck so the implementor knows what they have to change in
> their implementation but its also very important in process documents so participants can understand
> if they need to change how they do things
> 
> so, be nice to the participants and admit (in writing) what changes you are proposing
> 
> Scott
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email