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

"Eastlake III Donald-LDE008" <Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com> Tue, 17 June 2008 19:07 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 BA1433A68E7; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:07:47 -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 437B53A68C8; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.573
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.573 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.026, 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 qJDCXJFYiHkr; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:07:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail153.messagelabs.com (mail153.messagelabs.com [216.82.253.51]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 4DBB33A686A; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:07:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-153.messagelabs.com!1213729709!13330617!1
X-StarScan-Version: 5.5.12.14.2; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [144.189.100.102]
Received: (qmail 17173 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2008 19:08:30 -0000
Received: from motgate4.mot.com (HELO motgate4.mot.com) (144.189.100.102) by server-2.tower-153.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 17 Jun 2008 19:08:30 -0000
Received: from az33exr01.mot.com (az33exr01.mot.com [10.64.251.231]) by motgate4.mot.com (8.12.11/Motorola) with ESMTP id m5HJ8Tch019278; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:08:29 -0700 (MST)
Received: from az10vts02.mot.com (az10vts02.mot.com [10.64.251.243]) by az33exr01.mot.com (8.13.1/Vontu) with SMTP id m5HJ8Sd8026298; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 14:08:28 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from de01exm64.ds.mot.com (de01exm64.am.mot.com [10.176.8.15]) by az33exr01.mot.com (8.13.1/8.13.0) with ESMTP id m5HJ8QnG026280; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 14:08:27 -0500 (CDT)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: RE: Appeal against IESG blocking DISCUSS on draft-klensin-rfc2821bis
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:08:25 -0400
Message-ID: <3870C46029D1F945B1472F170D2D979003E44C22@de01exm64.ds.mot.com>
In-Reply-To: <1421.1213728582@epsilon.noi.kre.to>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Appeal against IESG blocking DISCUSS on draft-klensin-rfc2821bis
Thread-Index: AcjQrIt3mm5iXgoOQAaokKxktq07FAAAFULA
References: <049b01c8d089$6c901ce0$0a00a8c0@CPQ86763045110><8832006D4D21836CBE6DB469@klensin-asus.vbn.inter-touch.net><485590E2.3080107@gmail.com><p06250116c47c330c7dd0@[75.145.176.242]><4856DE3A.3090804@gmail.com> <1421.1213728582@epsilon.noi.kre.to>
From: "Eastlake III Donald-LDE008" <Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com>
To: <debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk>
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Cc: iesg@ietf.org, 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

The reason that RFC 2606 was made a BCP was that, at the time, it was
felt that a document with that level or approval was needed to reserve
domain names in the global Internet. Alternatively, it could have been
done with a standards track document, but that seemed inappropriate.

As has been stated, there is nothing in RFC 2606 constraining IETF
documents.

Donald
Author of RFC 2602

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Robert Elz
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 2:50 PM
To: debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk
Cc: iesg@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Appeal against IESG blocking DISCUSS on
draft-klensin-rfc2821bis 

    Date:        Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:50:02 +0100
    From:        "Debbie Garside" <debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk>
    Message-ID:  <049b01c8d089$6c901ce0$0a00a8c0@CPQ86763045110>

  | I would also add that to go against an IETF BCP

Huh?   The BCP in question says (in a bit more eloquent form)
"Here are some domain names that are reserved from all normal use,
and so are suitable for use in places where something with the
syntax of a valid domain names is required, but no real domain
name should be used - use them where applicable".

It does not say "you must use these domain names" (for any purpose
at all).

Where's the "go against an IETF BCP" here?

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