Re: draft-housley-two-maturity-levels

Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> Sat, 02 October 2010 03:07 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
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 5AB9A3A6BBA for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Oct 2010 20:07:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.408
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.408 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.190, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 FaxYx1FYBL9Z for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Oct 2010 20:07:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19D6E3A6BB8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Oct 2010 20:07:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wyi11 with SMTP id 11so4150514wyi.31 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 20:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=yJlJVgCWgDcasGgBVM4RyADjFKUIq30y4pn/bhS2feY=; b=v5VyEdpoIqprxweRbUk70GejxauII56YrUwP++lPLQZLbGkMAzdIGMCDg3AqzIxb/f drC7SGbsgx7xivM0v3Q7bMS9r1UigHcReXBLIqAyBunQiKfMp7P+VUM2/2dMbOuarriF oSe8QmdTOLtT323nb0cue+KlBOuvCjMEUhcGI=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=jxscAy35wMtA4SScsnGodNowjEiapMmxO/CxTVHM4pN62zyKlXiJjNXoxiG3l1Dv1V 0eYvogKG1uu4/hRz8XzZfrLfMW1Rtn8yZo2ZW6i7I5FQEU0+PHvDGmPp0eJUKUEu4GQw uAPtZAUvrpfmyr33qR1RJqJQEteodJ5NEykr4=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.21.204 with SMTP id r54mr5175581wer.95.1285988870487; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 20:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.166.9 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Oct 2010 20:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4C7EB142.3030209@vigilsec.com>
References: <20070.1278510136@erosen-linux> <4C3498CF.90206@dcrocker.net> <4C349E0E.7030904@gmx.de> <4C349ED8.6080706@bbiw.net> <4C7EB142.3030209@vigilsec.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 23:07:50 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=RPg9rD1fCoEHff7ZdebkLrn5=8jFfn=AtQ9qs@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-housley-two-maturity-levels
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0016364d1c87cf7e0a0491999dcc"
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 04 Oct 2010 08:47:35 -0700
Cc: 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-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, 02 Oct 2010 03:07:03 -0000

Back when the 3 step process was originally proposed, part of the rationale
for a low barrier to entry step one seems to have been the fact that in some
cases it is necessary to have code points assigned by IANA before work
actually gets done.

While there are some code points that are sufficiently scarce that a
standards action remains the appropriate criteria, there are really very few
for which that is true.

At this point there is no value to three steps because the requirements for
passing the first step are now much higher than they used to be are
 arguably higher than they used to be for the second step.

That creates something of a potential circle in which to get a draft ready
for PROPOSED Standard there is really no substitute for real world
deployment and in some cases that is not really viable until after you have
the code points.

I suggest that WGs and proto-WGs be encouraged to make use of the
EXPERIMENTAL and INFORMATIONAL status drafts for code point assignment in
the case that this is necessary to gain real world experience and that this
be recognized as an appropriate use of these stages.