Re: AD Sponsorship of draft-moonesamy-recall-rev

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Sun, 19 May 2019 00:41 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.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 0DEFD1200B5; Sat, 18 May 2019 17:41:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=WpsAluFu; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=Nm5tXkDy
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 9pW_gNBVJvkm; Sat, 18 May 2019 17:41:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9882F12004F; Sat, 18 May 2019 17:41:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([197.224.106.190]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x4J0fW2Q002889 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 18 May 2019 17:41:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1558226505; x=1558312905; bh=ZUeq1KM2fEETRjGFCa9mGNS3qOVRg4sM7hD65O3o6tM=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=WpsAluFunmn1Qfw5/YhKj4zMyD01mFPQGCGmGLL1GoC6RTHWAPrDu4Bkz/Gyf2Quv D0r4LTRcBkVN+1Ohf42at9DABjAztbpCg70ccgNHECNSPDv3BGOl0wVZd/Fb8DKh92 ggHtOYfy7OiGZTqkDfpTWXYh30ZGlGGeZ3xSlA6I=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1558226505; x=1558312905; i=@elandsys.com; bh=ZUeq1KM2fEETRjGFCa9mGNS3qOVRg4sM7hD65O3o6tM=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=Nm5tXkDy8SQD93DfxN/Qq3DwjC/euWoYYNWnHUhViLpJCA5Ptz7dRQ5I4vZQ6dv7t yVPF0Iq5P98KnpM5Ru6DIwg1bKtzqbDYyOIWTbdMLQfnr+c4Nqu+FAOfoKUyN2i/dV LI1EGshuOM6oaGObd/SEz+FQJgE0crbQwV609uA8=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20190518141450.1163e590@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Sat, 18 May 2019 17:33:41 -0700
To: chair@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Subject: Re: AD Sponsorship of draft-moonesamy-recall-rev
Cc: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <E85C84CF-DB0B-410E-A0B2-A7C7E705E469@kaloom.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20190509041736.0d6d4548@elandsys.com> <f5834466-8f40-42bd-82d8-4dcb7d418859@www.fastmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20190509105617.0c08ef60@elandnews.com> <e854adaf-1ead-41d0-95bf-df56cb5a5914@www.fastmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20190514234822.0bc461f0@elandnews.com> <15BCE05FEA1EEA6AD0E7E5BD@PSB> <6.2.5.6.2.20190516103829.11f9fb18@elandnews.com> <E85C84CF-DB0B-410E-A0B2-A7C7E705E469@kaloom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/oyIrFH_ZjQhM0zWZZ_YLoRfGTag>
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: Sun, 19 May 2019 00:41:49 -0000

Dear IETF Chair,

A few months ago, I submitted a short draft about the revision of the 
recall initiation model [1].  Last month, the recommendation of the 
IESG was to submit a BOF proposal [2].  I had an email exchange with 
one of the Area Directors about the request for an IAB shepherd.  If 
I am not mistaken, an IAB shepherd can provide a review of 
architectural consistency and integrity.  Does the short draft 
require that type of review?

The "we think" [2] from the IESG is expressed in one sentence.  Would 
it be possible for the IESG to explain its understanding of the 
in-depth problem statement so that there could be a discussion?

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

1. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moonesamy-recall-rev-02
2. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/KrycBOdMJzyypqFynXi9t1S1n-w