Re: New Version Notification for draft-resnick-variance-00.txt

Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Fri, 27 March 2020 23:20 UTC

Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.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 923DC3A0D52 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:20:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.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 qJ-9vj4z8Z6U for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CDB53A0D28 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B9A35C029A; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:20:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:20:18 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=Hkz57g0IiO7+x2G4lkLEUhYRxVQeq8ZB1ObqtAKyn oQ=; b=KaHCNz4sMrYdIEALr9avH6zVO+P4UfE8J9DkAzx3xgFMWz1jKRCglMb+t L0j2CWhmOnmh4JcShsTFY0RypreHQdUf6m5SFfMtDGnVsXjVyIxea+hwD7w0q2LB lS3pfljIpmMpI3r4DcBKlfWgn7zpmhiEuEGGQEQngL1gjQUULSjnMhTeJ+7IiXyp vrP/VNbrTPhBqHmK47V9yEwvfqh3jfwH3RqVEU/ZnfoFnVNfjq3UFeY8NUe8hsVV 5nekcqK6jm8bITxv58BCwYepIc88XIRKpEbTo4GLgCyWnDZSxiy+OcYHERibCFPt mA75ruxdvFzGLAv+5Or1sCOMgGdcw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:MYp-Xp2JEi_X7RQwFXbBQD6PSsQp6gCRh2ItlS1VysRaXlepEWCi6g>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudeitddgtdehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefuvfhfhffkffgfgggjtgfgsehtke ertddtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpefmvghithhhucfoohhorhgvuceomhhoohhrvgesnhgvthif ohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhmqeenucffohhmrghinhepihgvthhfrdhorhhgne cukfhppedutdekrddvvddurddukedtrdduheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecu rfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfihorhhkqdhhvghrvghtih gtshdrtghomh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:MYp-XnADJ8oBDWs57oWhGdzJrPoNaA3Y1lfemUZWkerq9NSlu5_seQ> <xmx:MYp-Xu9o4hwOZH9GZ_j1IL1w0XIyF5iwT1wAAqEc-HbwyY3dndjK3Q> <xmx:MYp-Xt-ft9nq1ZjuwQ8PCq1K4RfUGyOi_68m7aSzrWN8BprFBwxfCg> <xmx:Mop-XpFj_mpIPlugkWIqV7S06BRjRLK-ZBIU-KR1nUeAa_gJXpOJ_g>
Received: from [192.168.1.97] (108-221-180-15.lightspeed.knvltn.sbcglobal.net [108.221.180.15]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 97D6A328005A; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:20:17 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-resnick-variance-00.txt
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <158533925458.17797.13806166303625482245@ietfa.amsl.com> <AE66200A-E718-4BF6-BA87-EE427A0BF971@episteme.net> <0e9e0a5f-5022-9a06-b8be-46d922f31aa7@nostrum.com> <4f79a660-2268-dad0-e796-dc1fabfcf73d@network-heretics.com> <A2B6BC2A-5983-48D9-BF0E-F782BBA54004@episteme.net>
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Message-ID: <0b518909-d421-afe7-b473-3d7ea3b04648@network-heretics.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:20:17 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <A2B6BC2A-5983-48D9-BF0E-F782BBA54004@episteme.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/XpsL7FCUcRYCLNNHAjvrFfFZzV8>
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: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 23:20:21 -0000

On 3/27/20 7:15 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:

> For your reading pleasure, here is the Last Call discussion on that 
> statement, so there is precedent:
>
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?qdr=a&email_list=ietf&q=subject%3A(Policy%20Statement%20on%20the%20Day%20Pass%20Experiment)&as=1&so=date 
>

Sure, but there's not a written consensus-approved process to approve an 
IESG statement that's not reflected in an RFC.   And IESG doesn't get to 
dictate how nomcom operates.

>> I am not sure that it's within the IESG's purview to make such policy 
>> statements, especially since nomcom is not an IESG function.
>
> The IESG is the consensus caller for BCPs, and the NomCom process is a 
> BCP process, so I can see the argument. Also, the IESG was defining 
> attendance at an IETF meeting, which could arguably be a reasonable 
> thing for the IESG to do.

For other purposes, say whether someone gets a t-shirt, perhaps.   Not 
for nomcom purposes, IMO.

Keith