IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-hsyu-message-fragments replacement status updated by Cindy Morgan

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Mon, 09 May 2022 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
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 D2D52C159A1F; Mon, 9 May 2022 08:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z296t-liQ5tr; Mon, 9 May 2022 08:02:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5169C159A1D; Mon, 9 May 2022 08:02:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:bd48:861a:20dc:d6dc]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 668451DB64A; Mon, 9 May 2022 18:01:34 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1652108494; bh=kx/lCbvaixgSePblwor6eF2XAS7/WVD4l6amnKQ5Vqc=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=KKfhRrypL8IhHkhlADF+N0CqO+88HrL0MHvYmBNd3jkdq643nc+FQ0UW+6R9N9Nlo Sp4hJnbIgqoWhFfNhVV5/l1PVP9ikasyDJ5aRubweSk9Z4Zw7mJOdd/Rwiz1puQTpQ BZKkT1NoE4FQoMHTBK8ZjHSZ+H1QmtpsQmwJbaVI=
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_94B82129-3B31-4021-8483-28BF063A9B32"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.80.82.1.1\))
Subject: Re: draft-hsyu-message-fragments replacement status updated by Cindy Morgan
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
In-Reply-To: <7000069C-15D4-444F-89D1-79B0C89DFBB7@eggert.org>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2022 18:01:33 +0300
Cc: shane@time-travellers.org, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, "<dnsop@ietf.org>" <dnsop@ietf.org>, yliu@cfiec.net, hsyu@cfiec.net, hsyu@biigroup.cn
Message-Id: <99A58CF2-57E7-4129-9A73-A312954BDFDC@eggert.org>
References: <165116358815.5877.9244565954759130167@ietfa.amsl.com> <YmrKSN5OSQh2/SQf@d1> <CAF4+nEE0AJSjUfYXLjxUE94k544k_cK2v7HxNRS1XmSVOnQRPg@mail.gmail.com> <YmrlXv1/L6Ina504@d1> <2AD4D97C-3CAE-476C-B257-6AC7BD8F7F93@amsl.com> <7000069C-15D4-444F-89D1-79B0C89DFBB7@eggert.org>
To: Cindy Morgan <cmorgan@amsl.com>
X-MailScanner-ID: 668451DB64A.A28E1
X-MailScanner: Not scanned: please contact your Internet E-Mail Service Provider for details
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/_NUDLb3cFlRaacCgc4W0H-xBrlI>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
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: Mon, 09 May 2022 15:02:07 -0000

Hi,

On 2022-4-29, at 13:54, Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:
> the IESG is reviewing what has happened.

the IESG discussed this issue. Below is my personal attempt to summarize the outcome of this discussion.

We believe that it is permissible under the current rules to include sections of text that others have contributed to the IETF standards process - even extensive sections of text, as in this case - in a new IETF contribution.

However, we also believe that it is customary to at least acknowledge the source of any such copied material, or better, to reach out to inquire whether the original authors would like to be involved in a planned derivative of their original contribution.

We discussed whether any additional process or tooling was needed, and concluded that such instances are rare enough that the delays and overheads associated with new measures would be counterproductive overall.

Thanks,
Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email