Re: Appeal against IESG blocking DISCUSS on draft-klensin-rfc2821bis

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Wed, 18 June 2008 07:04 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 2CBF43A69B5; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:04:58 -0700 (PDT)
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 F2DEB3A696F for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:04:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 6J6cW6QnOQ8X for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:04:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20B943A6982 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:04:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDF8E39E6D9; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 09:05:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G0RMXGqt+1G9; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 09:05:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [172.28.60.80] (unknown [195.18.164.170]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE3BE39E687; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 09:05:40 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4858B3C5.8070203@alvestrand.no>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 09:05:41 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.14ubu (X11/20080502)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>
Subject: Re: Appeal against IESG blocking DISCUSS on draft-klensin-rfc2821bis
References: <8832006D4D21836CBE6DB469@klensin-asus.vbn.inter-touch.net> <485590E2.3080107@gmail.com> <p06250116c47c330c7dd0@[75.145.176.242]> <4856DE3A.3090804@gmail.com> <g36r20$bgq$1@ger.gmane.org> <48575B7E.9030003@ca.afilias.info> <87hcbse7du.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org>
In-Reply-To: <87hcbse7du.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org>
Cc: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>, 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/pipermail/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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Brian Dickson <briand@ca.afilias.info>; writes:
>
>   
>> Here's my suggestion:
>>
>> List 2606 in the informative references, and footnote the examples used 
>> to indicate
>> that they are "grandfathered" non-2606 examples.
>>
>> So, in text that previously read "not-example.com", it might read 
>> "not-example.com [*]",
>> with the references section having "[*] Note - non-RFC2606 examples 
>> used. Please read RFC2606."
>>
>> Something along those lines, should hopefully be enough to keep both 
>> sides happy, and resolve the DISCUSS,
>> and hopefully both set a suitable precedent *and* make moot the appeal.
>>     
>
> I think this sounds like a good compromise, and it does improve the
> document quality IMHO.  John, would this be an acceptable addition to
> the document?
I do not want a compromise on whether or not the IESG documents the 
rules it's enforcing.
BEFORE trying to enforce them "consistently", and using the 
"consistency" as an argument that what looks like a recommendation in a 
BCP is "really" a MUST.

               Harald

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