From nobody Tue Oct 19 04:27:03 2021 Return-Path: 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 4FE8D3A0B81 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 04:27:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 I8BChMeBuPbe for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 04:26:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E37A3A0B79 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 04:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F5B418071; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 07:27:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Ntvz-ewat6a4; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 07:27:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id B22481802D; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 07:27:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8DE7614; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 07:26:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Richardson To: Brian E Carpenter , tom petch , "Murray S. Kucherawy" , ietf Subject: Re: BCP97bis a process problem In-Reply-To: <969c6a44-902a-b929-82dc-a1a22c85244e@gmail.com> References: <616D935F.4090407@btconnect.com> <969c6a44-902a-b929-82dc-a1a22c85244e@gmail.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Archived-At: X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF-Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 11:27:01 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> I can think of two explanations. >> >> 1) the author is not familiar with the processes and thinks that I-D >> Nits it ordering the author to reclassify the reference >> >> 2) the author is familiar with the processes and is trying to game t= he >> system. > There's a possible 3rd explanation: > 3) the reference didn't need to be normative in the first place. > I certainly saw that a number of times as a Gen-ART reviewer. How can a third party point this out, unless they can read the document? The converse is worse: some informative reference that actually is normativ= e, but only implementers two years later recognize this. =2D- Michael Richardson . o O ( IPv6 I=C3=B8T consulti= ng ) Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEbsyLEzg/qUTA43uogItw+93Q3WUFAmFuq3sACgkQgItw+93Q 3WW5Ogf+O3OLba4da+uPrwtW9hdeCrteeBmXMJZlVp2webSUM3Y58qAIGpTz+0OF qtvGGfzFP8GZ6Bjl4kRh3x0nkXLTKQpuO13cLSusmXfw69g4QBHodW8hYpn2XrEx 4Sch6Zc0bqSPNAA1YUVIT7V5cr9HFRCe/kKZUzOvpeTMsZZd4YaEMTXI7qPliNrH xPAcKHnrN8Xu+9aJkVApXaD0L2JYZhaEsvD8Nd/eZUwr0VgrQ1Vsv0HDhcWMutbq 8cNHLotF6JDIifdLPuraSxmpfsCR81iEGVNA/Cuh4eNd4oW5z/U31VaFLhe9c0UB nL3agwMZABoEiqjAvyMjLrH24bT1Mw== =viAg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--