Re: BCP97bis a process problem

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 19 October 2021 21:36 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 59B3B3A0E51 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 14:36:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 517Nqnjj7gFb for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 14:36:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x42f.google.com (mail-pf1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42f]) (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 DE9083A0E21 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 14:36:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id y7so1113161pfg.8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 14:36:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=uP2E2XeLCEB6JD0uw4OgsHRwd+SjsVVZ7aY3DoxRfXg=; b=SEcStLv1aWPJkByXX+9M9T+y//r2k/m/0qmAbE2jQXqK+f7xhXMCama4PZPVvhMZfV A7eLvqe2VFsoBVCsURXMf7YaU1zIJdUSNSoH2ptKNievgAtiPsMgrQ7Ocp33gw7+gD0+ 2uQUe1LD0PY72QXVuWdiLiP1acrMB4CW1Lv5ZGwIJhBZo0MewEClK70zasH5suodv9Tg FpJp/tEzJJaJC8+15XQP99yQ3NmaZqc1eGR1VPK894ApNziprDjtfiKXqZjfUxhb/I1P 0/F0ZWGSD2PIYVCbLkIbreGi0ndoIKUoaFQ9BZfozrMuNlndPOz5NzDQbvV5GHaZw+4e SkPg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=uP2E2XeLCEB6JD0uw4OgsHRwd+SjsVVZ7aY3DoxRfXg=; b=gNK122QVsqi/hiOF7OnCI8aUirZC5QOE6l/FlVyfeTKqnbFHTWfpDwJFLflyr+hl5G eKlzHeIP74x/OVcYOfnUNaea7sUSW1SP4RY0oeHbaFYXNIAPSSYrZnt34G1zX7JeYZi2 3V9vq2mIvszQRlJf3C9Nm4xAtnd8lXU0j+HvGGQyI5yK+TytCSQJzfDjZnz1qef9I4xb UV22LK3ESln1FmWJeAR6Dh0D9MjnC3vnxQnJJm2uMgAGODCDIE+FPQVtzc2cfISrUwSQ HnOOUcC5qb/pGRPsplNmb7maa0N82+c+ecTYoe52KsjjFPZT1oH74+cNC1MOBxDqJPmD WuSQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531jg+KzBgjARc1LI0nEZU87sxitNx6fYS+D4nf+Z9E2PsObr/Oa BOxVoqw0q+r3efL6CSTe+ywinreZmkYMKQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzmvIqsCXGOWgaTgU0ae0ZGLj/Gpmd2Y1TopcclcXp1ttB/A5UWXNOPeh3Lh2WOFq9HBOSkLg==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:6a05:: with SMTP id f5mr29985068pgc.398.1634679411327; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 14:36:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:102d:e801:db7:d041:a2d:ce65? ([2406:e003:102d:e801:db7:d041:a2d:ce65]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x40sm176527pfh.83.2021.10.19.14.36.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Oct 2021 14:36:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: BCP97bis a process problem
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com>, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>, ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <CAL0qLwbwvs2Cp_urgJ=hzc6yEMGDaz3C0xf6RQXRrB89wAx=Rw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwavK5dYdmYPVxdMT5rA=jBZv1cEyAsVBEWOD7p9MoZR1g@mail.gmail.com> <616D935F.4090407@btconnect.com> <969c6a44-902a-b929-82dc-a1a22c85244e@gmail.com> <23135.1634642811@localhost>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d3984af3-bf12-4111-9694-0c9eccd83d6d@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 09:46:59 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <23135.1634642811@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/fkpcKtmTYRcZTAV9tozG2oBwrg8>
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, 19 Oct 2021 21:37:01 -0000

On 20-Oct-21 00:26, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>     >> I can think of two explanations.
>     >>
>     >> 1) the author is not familiar with the processes and thinks that I-D
>     >> Nits it ordering the author to reclassify the reference
>     >>
>     >> 2) the author is familiar with the processes and is trying to game the
>     >> system.
> 
>     > There's a possible 3rd explanation:
> 
>     > 3) the reference didn't need to be normative in the first place.
>     > I certainly saw that a number of times as a Gen-ART reviewer.
> 
> How can a third party point this out, unless they can read the document?
> The converse is worse: some informative reference that actually is normative,
> but only implementers two years later recognize this.

Well yes. That's exactly why, during my career as a Gen-ART reviewer, I tried
to pay attention to this whole issue. But there is scope for human error here,
so it's going to happen from time to time.

    Brian