IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Trans WG inactive?

Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org> Fri, 18 December 2020 13:36 UTC

Return-Path: <rdd@cert.org>
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 BBFBB3A067A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 05:36:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cert.org
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 m9NAcF9Cw9N5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 05:36:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from veto.sei.cmu.edu (veto.sei.cmu.edu [147.72.252.17]) (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 088B93A07D1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 05:36:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from korb.sei.cmu.edu (korb.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.21.30]) by veto.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 0BIDaVh0032162; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 08:36:31 -0500
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 veto.sei.cmu.edu 0BIDaVh0032162
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cert.org; s=yc2bmwvrj62m; t=1608298591; bh=WNsPjS3kE1v00RgHT0WSceWbQl9WOOWifUWoTnWaZuQ=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=cosaSxi4tdWyKmh98qQn2Xe5B+mHyPzj9K6TnUbOgt7jT/zh5jRS1RvxMRVZODEwk evGBP2Evz1xOVVUA32sm0JepXaE/Zn57DAF/4wH2wbYLJUpu98uXi4uSwBqjcZNWXl wrebZ0n3558FsyESRY/mjEkZqQbWYC0o05LyaRHU=
Received: from MURIEL.ad.sei.cmu.edu (muriel.ad.sei.cmu.edu [147.72.252.47]) by korb.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 0BIDaTVt008823; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 08:36:29 -0500
Received: from MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu (147.72.252.46) by MURIEL.ad.sei.cmu.edu (147.72.252.47) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 08:36:28 -0500
Received: from MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([fe80::555b:9498:552e:d1bb]) by MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([fe80::555b:9498:552e:d1bb%13]) with mapi id 15.01.2106.002; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 08:36:28 -0500
From: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Trans WG inactive?
Thread-Topic: Trans WG inactive?
Thread-Index: AQHW1RVymlFfVqy8rU2Q+hRr/z5WQqn817mw
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:36:27 +0000
Message-ID: <427723b4cc2d492a90909c120feb31b8@cert.org>
References: <bf1c31c5-d018-533d-e9b6-331995f461d2@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <bf1c31c5-d018-533d-e9b6-331995f461d2@gmx.de>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.64.202.251]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/3tLlULsDaHfYVLExenLz1EEPilU>
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: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:36:38 -0000

Hi Julian!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf <ietf-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Julian Reschke
> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2020 3:11 AM
> To: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
> Subject: Trans WG inactive?
> 
> Hi there,
> 
> I was wondering why one of our HTTPBIS documents doesn't get published:
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-expect-ct/> - it has been in
> the RFC Editor queue for almost two years now.
> 
> Turns out that it depends on
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis/>, which is in
> state "revised ID needed"; and has been in that state since spring.
> 
> The Trans WG's mailing list doesn't show any activity since June.
> 
> What's going on here?

The TRANS WG has one remaining document, draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis, to finish.  After much delay, a renewed push is underway to address the DISCUSS feedback from IESG Review.

Regards,
Roman

> Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email