IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: AD Sponsorship of draft-moonesamy-recall-rev

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Wed, 24 April 2019 23:43 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.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 AFEDD120477 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 16:43:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cryptonector.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 pNvizUSH1w5C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 16:43:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ladybird.maple.relay.mailchannels.net (ladybird.maple.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.214.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFE98120476 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 16:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 382AF5E10CB; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 23:43:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a99.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-2-149.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.2.149]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 99DA15E0FDD; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 23:43:45 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a99.g.dreamhost.com ([TEMPUNAVAIL]. [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.17.2); Wed, 24 Apr 2019 23:43:46 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Whistle-Plucky: 4c77b9997edd1a4f_1556149426063_3214076441
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1556149426062:3556014149
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1556149426062
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a99.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a99.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79E827FEDA; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 16:43:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=AbJDdpKHok0z64 pzCDlg4CFY1jE=; b=ToPOlbfMjX4QT7M1Rniy7R/v7Q1rIisis/4jfeas4wDY5N JdkRynj4X9EiaIKZLShCekcehCRv7w2rFQIn5vYoDp0otEegU7d92UmUKsTjC3ae 50aJuI51t6mwilVLBr4kjmqIVnx/F+OYs96Y27uP1dfFIN5IW6UJVqwJADJzU=
Received: from localhost (unknown [24.28.108.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a99.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8EC617FED8; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 16:43:37 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 18:43:35 -0500
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a99
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Subject: Re: AD Sponsorship of draft-moonesamy-recall-rev
Message-ID: <20190424234334.GQ3137@localhost>
References: <72f00d0b-7ec6-ba6a-b17b-97879d457ae3@comcast.net> <CAKKJt-fOMMdM-mkbJaYpsH6XPCpatUkwZY-d_A+MaNa3nhaNDg@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBNdaWU4wwOK_MnWC5hOr7Lu3osmC_6_KKxB5fHuHVHyTw@mail.gmail.com> <23d54797-5c94-aa00-ec55-3f2c4fdfcfae@comcast.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20190424095017.13cdadc8@elandnews.com> <51068F13-E90F-42A2-8AE2-627D5E18B145@akamai.com> <20190424201939.GM3137@localhost> <6.2.5.6.2.20190424134823.0c9faf68@elandnews.com> <20190424211123.GO3137@localhost> <6.2.5.6.2.20190424144539.0cabcde0@elandnews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20190424144539.0cabcde0@elandnews.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK
X-VR-OUT-SCORE: -100
X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduuddrheefgddvgecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfftffgtefojffquffvnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujggfsehttdertddtredvnecuhfhrohhmpefpihgtohcuhghilhhlihgrmhhsuceonhhitghosegtrhihphhtohhnvggtthhorhdrtghomheqnecukfhppedvgedrvdekrddutdekrddukeefnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhhouggvpehsmhhtphdphhgvlhhopehlohgtrghlhhhoshhtpdhinhgvthepvdegrddvkedruddtkedrudekfedprhgvthhurhhnqdhprghthheppfhitghoucghihhllhhirghmshcuoehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmqedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmpdhnrhgtphhtthhopehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/V-9Aujcpxn93hELmOIGSwuM-6-4>
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: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 23:43:49 -0000

On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 03:28:19PM -0700, S Moonesamy wrote:
> At 02:11 PM 24-04-2019, Nico Williams wrote:
> > What's the problem with holding a BoF?
> 
> It doesn't make sense to ask a person who lacks extensive travel resources
> to fly to Canada to hold a BoF about a short draft.

You could participate remotely.

Seriously, please stop suggesting that your I-D not getting sponsored is
a moral or ethical failure on the part of the ADs.  You've been given a
way forward that fits our publication process.

We have a process for publication of Standards-Track and BCP RFCs.  That
process involves an optional BoF, a WG Last Call, definitely IETF Last
Call, and IESG review.  It would be strange to skip the BoF and the WG
LC steps, and it would be stranger still to have an IETF LC on a draft
that has had this much discussion and no other forum for discussing it.

An AD sponsoring this I-D as it is might well be grounds for a recall
petition!  :^/

Nico
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email