IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Status of this memo

Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Tue, 27 April 2021 19:33 UTC

Return-Path: <d3e3e3@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 DA2D03A1D57 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 12:33:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.848
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.848 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, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 (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 Zq8SuwTw4ddH for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 12:33:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd2e.google.com (mail-io1-xd2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2e]) (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 6563A3A1D51 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 12:33:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2e.google.com with SMTP id q25so17297238iog.5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 12:33:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=uzWXknFQtWkKAREkC/xz+I6L+Mrx9l2RwbxPvyPbdcs=; b=AgWsh2v1yaQ4OQCmJspbZi+tFN2HGEpcM/ehrbppY4AKO782vMmxT6EMYWU8IysIbO rMSKO65H2exWcSUhoxVpfRZstp9/jev/jAnydExmcR52fR0NIvD95BCRJJt/1YH1+glB xjQD5kFJPF7NE6AuF2jAbDo1tx+G8VcFvV0XTVReywgip/GGWGmtynNUpcqsBsc0ENy2 rLA3SFdEkd4wygYD4+Xv7CfhAJ1nkHcaG+Zo1JYjnLGkoD5+CX9ryOz9VporssT0TGQn UTRqV4qdIclcxky+aNpfJkXUrOYBHX6EPHC3sa9lkeetPwFSVm8DtCY0625enpyGpGrp Xkew==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uzWXknFQtWkKAREkC/xz+I6L+Mrx9l2RwbxPvyPbdcs=; b=twUBzOSf4D92qQK8btEFm4x6I3TQ/FA9/T9mOWrhJss/Jzgq5pipcdSO+V556crBwf lsXC4cFcTACmxhUcvHVWJMFtfk3DbkonfhCIB+Q4Gxb1jLLtzwZ1RKc267yOUvuXUstT uqpmPaPM8lnXyKHKDDJ9ZzQqVJastEmituTv2yGnlBXJYWCX8nXigHqYWqCPgXmHCe4X Jm5I7FCERocRw0cfX6wW3Cr2nHEfd4PVh6i0B4gKY46QzkoarUr0Ib9YjdlLvTdq8xDw Q2XeQZwaMGx9AY32acP3g0FyevsfBs0FfNEM2U3KjoCbQfsy2jy5pgimFsChqVude4Cg ZnBQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530sQz1TBxd9SPAJX6jnWBbUMcqwydHQ4XSJLqgqyDn2jc4cbLqr fzHkwHL4pzqhf/UqIXZLnsUYBZN9lmH4a25vIfmw+5QudNJDHg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy+Id+QS+IlBIG+l/G/bYAiaiV92b7yqIND8uyth8tVLwJ8A0DgQ6wFvpQLzs5HwRyqknGBAQ/4U9PTvsM5eTg=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:cdc6:: with SMTP id d189mr19631167iog.46.1619551983492; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 12:33:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <376f83f0-89a3-cd0e-1792-c8434bd8a5d2@gmail.com> <9ACE59FA-30B6-475A-AF6B-4B874E4A2788@eggert.org> <1804294246.5904.1619512137931@appsuite-gw2.open-xchange.com> <D653D3B2-7666-409A-B856-2A4B1BA958CA@eggert.org> <3DBB64B1-40B8-4BC3-B66C-7F9B7F395874@akamai.com> <b5210c71-9500-3dba-05d2-4ae1c6ad16e9@network-heretics.com> <CAA=duU1VJs2vCE=uCF=fXO7FNedn9yPAaZWTgcaAiHTexA8uWA@mail.gmail.com> <d0fe9cb6-4a75-4d24-5c9c-15e239ccf5c3@network-heretics.com>
In-Reply-To: <d0fe9cb6-4a75-4d24-5c9c-15e239ccf5c3@network-heretics.com>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 15:32:52 -0400
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEHOR+ykyRrzTiOb_2RCJGPOuVkz4na6fz2g_CSKV5YrXw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Status of this memo
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Cc: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/4himRJw02nqn7WObhEc4MgquCns>
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, 27 Apr 2021 19:33:10 -0000

On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 11:35 AM Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/27/21 11:06 AM, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
>
> > I disagree. WGs have charters, which result in RFCs. During that
> > process, they have consensus-based working drafts that are refined to
> > meet their charter goals. That's an "adopted" draft. But it doesn't
> > have to be based on a single individual draft, a working draft can be
> > the result of merging earlier individual drafts, or can even originate
> > as a WG draft without a preceding individual draft or drafts. But yes,
> > working drafts do reflect WG consensus, and they have formal standing
> > as such.
>
> emphatically disagree, and as said earlier I believe it is a Bad Idea to
> give such draft more status than they deserve.

I think "adopted" is entirely accurate, reasonable, and deserved. But
I'm not sure why we should get too wrapped around the axle about that
word. It would not bother me too much if personal drafts had a file
name like d1-lastname-wgname-... and adopted drafts had a name like
d2-ietf-wgname-... It would even be shorter.

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com

> Keith

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email