IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: PS Characterization Clarified

Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com> Tue, 17 September 2013 22:48 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qti.qualcomm.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 62A1211E85B7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:48:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.364
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.364 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.235, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4-9a8OVbTxv6 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:48:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com (wolverine01.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.254]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85FE411E85FB for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:48:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qti.qualcomm.com; i=@qti.qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1379458107; x=1410994107; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=x1xBXFGoOGOI78Vik8YqA18+QgWDYFVS7fd0kHc94zo=; b=hHEbOVxSYOURQnw3hJcbBjr1ihCFihkEpv3FcpPGGuUd4+KV+eZrFFJM quttBOri1W7ubHS9+bnXtSOjwHEg953MDWSrJJaY+3o8OQrYucAocDQyM eFQXDu8vaP9naOfikxmjobRJUkto10xSg5ViprpvtccPwhEQt94c2ZwKU o=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,7201"; a="74952759"
Received: from ironmsg02-lv.qualcomm.com ([10.47.202.183]) by wolverine01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 17 Sep 2013 15:48:12 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,7201"; a="19630954"
Received: from nasanexhc08.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.39.7]) by ironmsg02-lv.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 17 Sep 2013 15:48:11 -0700
Received: from resnick2.qualcomm.com (172.30.39.5) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.39.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.146.2; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:48:11 -0700
Message-ID: <5238DC29.6050409@qti.qualcomm.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 17:48:09 -0500
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100630 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Olaf Kolkman <olaf@NLnetLabs.nl>
Subject: Re: PS Characterization Clarified
References: <B8F661D1-1C45-4A4B-9EFE-C7E32A7654E7@NLnetLabs.nl> <FDF0E85C-83C1-4AC2-A6EA-FA0E2E3DD34C@NLnetLabs.nl>
In-Reply-To: <FDF0E85C-83C1-4AC2-A6EA-FA0E2E3DD34C@NLnetLabs.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [172.30.39.5]
Cc: IETF list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 17 Sep 2013 22:48:31 -0000

On 9/17/13 11:27 AM, Olaf Kolkman wrote:
> I just posted the third version of the draft at:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kolkman-proposed-standards-clarified-02

I would like to change "IESG" to "IETF" in five places:

Section 1:

"the IESG has evolved its review processes"

Section 2:

"IESG Reveiew of Proposed Standards"
"the IESG strengthened its review"
"last chance for the IESG to ensure the quality"
"cross-area technical review performed by the IESG"

The IETF as a whole, through directorate reviews, area reviews, doctor 
reviews, *and* IESG reviews, has evolved, strengthened, ensured, etc., 
its reviews.

Saying "the IESG" in these places implies precedent setting that I think 
would be bad. If the IETF capitulated to the IESG changing the rules on 
its own in the past, so be it, but I think it would be bad to indicate 
in a BCP that we think it's OK for the IESG to do so unilaterally.

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status