Re: draft-housley-two-maturity-levels

Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com> Sat, 30 July 2011 16:55 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@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 B2CDA21F8892 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 09:55:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.496
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.496 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.103, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AX7FU9oHXqXy for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 09:55:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com (wolverine01.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.254]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30D1921F874E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 09:55:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qualcomm.com; i=presnick@qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1312044954; x=1343580954; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc: subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:x-originating-ip; z=Message-ID:=20<4E343791.7040401@qualcomm.com>|Date:=20Sa t,=2030=20Jul=202011=2011:55:45=20-0500|From:=20Pete=20Re snick=20<presnick@qualcomm.com>|User-Agent:=20Mozilla/5.0 =20(Macintosh=3B=20U=3B=20Intel=20Mac=20OS=20X=2010.6=3B =20en-US=3B=20rv:1.9.1.9)=20Gecko/20100630=20Eudora/3.0.4 |MIME-Version:=201.0|To:=20Eric=20Burger=20<eburger-l@sta ndardstrack.com>|CC:=20Bradner=20Scott=20<sob@harvard.edu >,=20IETF=20<ietf@ietf.org>|Subject:=20Re:=20draft-housle y-two-maturity-levels|References:=20<20110728121904.2D22A D7A76F@newdev.eecs.harvard.edu>=09<12B69DB8-AFDD-4C40-BC9 A-0A8158D9F7C0@nostrum.com>=20<0D43A851-C57B-484F-ADDD-BB D7A412689C@standardstrack.com>|In-Reply-To:=20<0D43A851-C 57B-484F-ADDD-BBD7A412689C@standardstrack.com> |Content-Type:=20text/plain=3B=20charset=3D"ISO-8859-1" =3B=20format=3Dflowed|Content-Transfer-Encoding:=207bit |X-Originating-IP:=20[172.30.48.1]; bh=7Rak34oXsXN+4qDspjgkOqYT/oFGuN1NXRgTO/4KreE=; b=wfN+1zi+bLp1I/AjrEbJFe9ttXKDoFfCuUxW2wuENg0AWmr5vMMKDZpc 6EIlf0E3u1Rv8e8QL+8fbdy6i1c8cIjCHehbrGx0l3duk/0hRTmtfllJc Bh5lcPzxsskf/HYumPh0eJQtTCDdXGy5Y48qKKtIq4KD5qf1dvEvbCxhm s=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6423"; a="107053557"
Received: from ironmsg02-r.qualcomm.com ([172.30.46.16]) by wolverine01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 30 Jul 2011 09:55:47 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,291,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="155247540"
Received: from nasanexhc05.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.48.2]) by ironmsg02-R.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 30 Jul 2011 09:55:47 -0700
Received: from Macintosh-4.local (172.30.48.1) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.48.2) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.0; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 09:55:46 -0700
Message-ID: <4E343791.7040401@qualcomm.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:55:45 -0500
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100630 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eric Burger <eburger-l@standardstrack.com>
Subject: Re: draft-housley-two-maturity-levels
References: <20110728121904.2D22AD7A76F@newdev.eecs.harvard.edu> <12B69DB8-AFDD-4C40-BC9A-0A8158D9F7C0@nostrum.com> <0D43A851-C57B-484F-ADDD-BBD7A412689C@standardstrack.com>
In-Reply-To: <0D43A851-C57B-484F-ADDD-BBD7A412689C@standardstrack.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [172.30.48.1]
Cc: Bradner Scott <sob@harvard.edu>, IETF <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: Sat, 30 Jul 2011 16:55:53 -0000

On 7/28/11 9:03 AM, Eric Burger wrote:

>> On Jul 28, 2011, at 8:19 AM, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
>>> 1/ I still see no reason to think that this change will cause any
>>> significant change in the percent of Proposed Standards that move up the
>>> (shorter) standards track since the proposal does nothing to change the
>>> underlying reasons that people do not expend the effort needed to
>>> advance documents
>
> And the real question is, are we moving forward? I think that we are not moving as far as we originally wanted. However, I offer we are moving a baby step forward, and as such is worthwhile doing.
>    

On 7/28/11 6:07 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Let's just make this baby step and stop worrying about it.
>    

Not to pick on Eric and Brian alone; I put this to everyone.

I *really* want an answer to the issue that Scott raises. Eric and Brian 
each refer to a "baby step". A baby step toward what exactly?

If the answer is simply, "to align documentation with current 
procedure", that's fine, but then I want to know: a) Why is it useful 
and positive to line up documentation with current procedure? That is, 
what are we gaining by publishing this? and b) This document is 
identical to neither 2026 *nor* current procedure, so how is it 
accomplishing the goal of aligning with current procedure anyway?

If the answer is, "Yes, this document will cause a change in the percent 
of Proposed Standards that move up", then I want to know "How?", because 
like Scott, I haven't heard the answer stated in this dicussion.

If you think I've missed an obvious alternative reason to go ahead with 
this document, I'm open to hear it, but it sounds like the only two 
alternatives expressed so far are, "Document current practice" and 
"Improve number of documents moving along standards track", and I 
haven't heard how this document does either of those things.

I consider this an open, unaddressed, issue.

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102