IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-housley-two-maturity-levels

Dave CROCKER <dhc2@dcrocker.net> Thu, 24 March 2011 16:00 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc2@dcrocker.net>
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 AAB2C28C0D0 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:00:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 x0lC8ZF8m-ew for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:00:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50EA728C0DE for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:00:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.12.208.53] ([217.194.73.178]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p2OG1jwc007705 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:01:56 -0700
Message-ID: <4D8B6AD7.2040102@dcrocker.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:01:27 +0100
From: Dave CROCKER <dhc2@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-housley-two-maturity-levels
References: <4B803580-664C-42B3-92A7-712452F12BA3@gmail.com> <01NTJJR8423E000CVY@mauve.mrochek.com> <20101027171037.GB3162@nsn.com> <63DD35D1-1C25-401D-8C05-992A2D11E3DE@vigilsec.com> <4D3E4DFD.4060906@att.com> <AFB68E6F-A22B-414D-941A-35BB57F4F0E0@vigilsec.com> <4D53E92A.4080008@att.com> <4D5412B4.9050600@bbiw.net> <4D541897.2050206@att.com> <4B0C7B49-F997-46D9-92BE-956983837CF1@vigilsec.com> <4D574B08.2060905@att.com> <7AF5A8CC-9B2D-45FB-80CB-34D68098336B@vigilsec.com> <4D8B6418.90800@gmail.com> <4D8B665A.8000402@joelhalpern.com> <4D8B67F3.6030203@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D8B67F3.6030203@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:01:57 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
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: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 16:00:26 -0000

On 3/24/2011 4:49 PM, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:>
>>> Another proposal as for your document. So, it fails to mention what are
>>> the procedures for reclassification of Standards Track RFCs to Historic.


Generally, the document tries to limit itself to discussion of what it changes.

There are no changes proposed for moving to Historic. (The question of Historic 
has not been part of the many discussions about streamlining the standards 
labeling.)

Hence that issue is out of scope for the document.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email