Re: Conclusion of the last call on draft-housley-two-maturity-levels

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Sat, 03 September 2011 16:11 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.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 56B9321F8A7B for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Sep 2011 09:11:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.497
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.102, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 5yZj7h0nVzpN for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 3 Sep 2011 09:11:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from odin.smetech.net (mail.smetech.net [208.254.26.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A66B821F8A71 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 3 Sep 2011 09:11:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [208.254.26.81]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9724CF240A7; Sat, 3 Sep 2011 12:13:15 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net
Received: from odin.smetech.net ([208.254.26.82]) by localhost (ronin.smetech.net [208.254.26.81]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GqLiBFe7KK7e; Sat, 3 Sep 2011 12:13:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.101] (pool-96-231-29-247.washdc.fios.verizon.net [96.231.29.247]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F10EF24014; Sat, 3 Sep 2011 12:13:15 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Conclusion of the last call on draft-housley-two-maturity-levels
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail-106--395738887"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <F1A6B083-5E3B-47A7-8C01-1A4E29EAACA1@network-heretics.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:13:13 -0400
Message-Id: <2248C31E-C39A-43AE-A9ED-88B4E5E4E586@vigilsec.com>
References: <20110728121904.2D22AD7A76F@newdev.eecs.harvard.edu> <4E5D4570.9080108@piuha.net> <85BEBBFE35549CAF8000DCE9@PST.JCK.COM> <F1A6B083-5E3B-47A7-8C01-1A4E29EAACA1@network-heretics.com>
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: 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, 03 Sep 2011 16:11:37 -0000

Keith:

The current IETF Standards Process has become essentially a one-step process.  The goal, as I believe is stated in the document, is gather some benefit from implementation and deployment experience.  We are not getting that today.  When we do get it, the document recycles at the same maturity level due to problems that are not addressed in this proposal, must commonly dependencies on documents that are not ready to advance.  So, the reader cannot tell when a document has the benefit of implementation and deployment experience.

My reading of the comments on earlier proposals was to focus on one problem in the document, so the handling of the dependency problem and others was removed.  I'm pleased to work on them in the future if this document gains rough consensus.

Russ


On Sep 2, 2011, at 4:37 PM, Keith Moore wrote:

> Honestly, the thing that is the most broken about this draft is the idea that there's something wrong with our process because few drafts make it to full standard, so the solution is to short-circuit the process.  The transition from Draft to Full Standard is the least of the problems with our process.  And the sooner we stop trying to fix irrelevancies, the better.
> 
> Keith