Re: [Trustees] ANNOUNCEMENT: The IETF Trustees invite your review and comments on a proposed Work-Around to the Pre-5378 Problem

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Fri, 09 January 2009 19:43 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 746A63A6892; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:43:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 430F63A691E for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:43:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.571
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.571 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.028, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QVkLR21bbHPi for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:43:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com (ti-out-0910.google.com [209.85.142.189]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A5B23A68FD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:43:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id a6so6485408tib.25 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 09 Jan 2009 11:43:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=e+4+XTujq6fOq38+UKwHWw5e4FKlsXvGd5qYD1rafqw=; b=tR7oRm2XQmAwynl0ICT9xR1BRz9uekprGUFNUZyxTkZRrkiHZimol2f6v93bXlwqD1 XBq1foKbb9x7X/aMUVJhiwoc98cV5sukY420jLdIWP8NLzMPhPbHdIU8/fnTrYiGybMo Hgoj8ya2U7dkKmiwuqWoTn858QJQ1T+7XawcQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=R+2VQt1txBxZ1PG4hd6NlZiD/zY0bMV+gIBHhLdqC5MkieMKvPEoZkn/Qs7ObKgdyE VmzWrKAka5B3iy0j0gONYJjZf0ByNQChxaYKkgjQBmkUI0ndDeQ+RvExpYWF+HnMrSGC AAmJTfpHR3Sq8UVSP54JkVyzQS+gfe31mPI14=
Received: by 10.110.2.2 with SMTP id 2mr2812166tib.40.1231530213863; Fri, 09 Jan 2009 11:43:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?10.1.1.4? (118-93-185-90.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz [118.93.185.90]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w12sm1801714tib.33.2009.01.09.11.43.31 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 09 Jan 2009 11:43:33 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4967A8E0.8040309@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:43:28 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: John Leslie <john@jlc.net>
Subject: Re: [Trustees] ANNOUNCEMENT: The IETF Trustees invite your review and comments on a proposed Work-Around to the Pre-5378 Problem
References: <70873A2B7F744826B0507D4B84903E60@noisy> <FB8A848E-E415-4CDE-9E3F-5C74A5614F18@cisco.com> <49678B2A.8000100@dcrocker.net> <20090109181503.GP24908@verdi>
In-Reply-To: <20090109181503.GP24908@verdi>
Cc: dcrocker@bbiw.net, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

John,

On 2009-01-10 07:15, John Leslie wrote:
...
>> In other words, remove the new requirement and we no longer have a
>> crisis. We have an issue to pursue -- the same one that prompted
>> the new requirement -- but no crisis.
> 
>    Alas, I must disagree. We have an IETF Consensus document (5378),
> and that consensus must be overturned to get to where Dave claims
> we are. In my experience, overturning consensus is hard. (That's
> the _point_ of having a consensus process.)
> 
>    However wrong some of us (now) believe that consensus to be, we
> should not expect to overturn it in 30 days -- whereas this quick
> fix can be applied in 30 days. I strongly urge all of us to let
> the quick fix go through without holding it hostage to overturning
> the consensus of 5378.

I agree. I also agree with the Trust's claim that it has discretion
to apply this fix *right now* by allowing documents to go out
containing the disclaimer, without any need to seek IETF consensus
for another change to BCP 78. I've proposed a specific change to
BCP 78 that would (IMNSHO) act as a permanent fix, but we don't
need that to go forward with normal business.

    Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf