IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Status of this memo

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Tue, 27 April 2021 13:02 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 6EA7E3A17F0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 06:02:03 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cSF3oQtHxgcU for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 06:01:58 -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 A8E8F3A17E4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 06:01:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:c5c0:d78c:9157:c015]) (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 BC2C0600345; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 16:01:44 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1619528504; bh=t0Sy+eFA9NcEG1oRzIrI87FSCG/4XyrM2ssG/UHeb6E=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=FE0xymS6EGRkHkn1x7JwE82IGsbp1NCTalrL+skk7i4YHkHyS23PIERZ5xQy3MJqI Q4TgfQkflu2Spjdg3IFUN5uXLXVJj96pvRB4dF0BJ/jR837EPSz6KROjCfO9MVpqlT MlJzgqIFi3SYCRGUvUeK2a6NX1QEuHJzBk7q/Duc=
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-Id: <1B2562DF-A451-4FFE-BDFD-84BB31CC96DD@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C8B4B27E-29C1-4329-BE0E-F9F0B4019BE1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.80.0.2.43\))
Subject: Re: Status of this memo
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 16:01:44 +0300
In-Reply-To: <620f38e4-94f7-2b8c-54f0-1895ce2dded2@network-heretics.com>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
References: <376f83f0-89a3-cd0e-1792-c8434bd8a5d2@gmail.com> <9ACE59FA-30B6-475A-AF6B-4B874E4A2788@eggert.org> <1804294246.5904.1619512137931@appsuite-gw2.open-xchange.com> <D653D3B2-7666-409A-B856-2A4B1BA958CA@eggert.org> <620f38e4-94f7-2b8c-54f0-1895ce2dded2@network-heretics.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.80.0.2.43)
X-MailScanner-ID: BC2C0600345.A1857
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/bArkIHOg8qzWDKdTPz-sEQqPYCE>
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: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 13:02:03 -0000

Hi,

On 2021-4-27, at 15:40, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> wrote:
> The very notion of "adoption" of a draft by the IETF (or at least by a working group) is a Bad Idea, as it tends to indicate an assumed direction for the WG that isn't yet reflected by a deep understanding of the draft or its implications, and makes it harder for a WG to change direction.

I'm not sure I follow. WGs have adopted I-Ds for decades; it's the usual way in which the IETF works, and is what causes I-D names to change from draft-yourname to draft-ietf.

This process is central to our way of working; we even commissioned specific datatracker functionality for it ten years ago (RFC6174) and discussed the common practice in RFC7221.

Thanks,
Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email