IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Review of: Characterization of Proposed Standards

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Sat, 02 November 2013 23:31 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@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 274DB11E8241 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 16:31:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.958
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.958 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uK-4b278bUcc for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 16:31:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-x234.google.com (mail-qc0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C547911E8143 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 16:31:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qc0-f180.google.com with SMTP id e9so3237446qcy.39 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 16:31:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=AV6atNxlGqhhq3NiPuOsuw0haGA/kgF7B1DRfxQkJYM=; b=1Ba24HNVeCe1qIKg0A10QW35pmsAuZpuXQjcXA2skELBtZU00mOmaq/A5Ond7geyxv WmXIJOOARaU7Mun1lE7sluJlm/UiByay5yFP6Um0H/U2GoqtaivDKfTi+e/EEVoSUmsj 5OhvwThx2YllqRbyl2pKNADmbletEkoZF34caJjjIC1Sa3rs8xCqy6oKHF0F04K1Zuol XMHHt4Aool0aWcWTiLmqFxubIGE0Do7whTgt+ZUiFrUXUl0bV33/+kJuAzDQsIvBMsV6 8u9AFOX1TshSK4FxWBtqU60Paz407NHOp90Q+6vjQt+zqVfdREGijehzUETRAHFZvFto 3TCA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.229.182.69 with SMTP id cb5mr13017118qcb.19.1383435062880; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 16:31:02 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com
Received: by 10.224.67.130 with HTTP; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 16:31:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5275804D.9050200@dcrocker.net>
References: <5269209F.3060706@dcrocker.net> <B4B31C25-C472-41B3-AAF8-96670E0E243F@NLnetLabs.nl> <52729C1D.7010400@dcrocker.net> <CAC4RtVCewEKatJKJnBbCqgsuBjHCOHY49WoTx+y-K_zDt+Smxg@mail.gmail.com> <40AFC5D09A1926489ECFED9D7633D98A20045B@ESESSMB307.ericsson.se> <CALaySJJ_o=YTgmzsUmJRWfNwH1-5DnhyKF_xDXa8nKQ=5_-jRQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJKC+hP5SRn5-Euh7ugjRB-iQU5Wd090PKh-W+F8Y7adxQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJJkbjCd9M=b_gZEGk9Y3nA1KH3hFoi45Sr1Z5=UFg5HgA@mail.gmail.com> <52757BC3.9020100@dcrocker.net> <CALaySJKJUVJP3Z-TtS2Yc+9-14L1LX7c5=ZnP4wUf27fvhVnXw@mail.gmail.com> <5275804D.9050200@dcrocker.net>
Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 19:31:02 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: zhkittLIC0-z9-VS-Lkvq3uXsbA
Message-ID: <CALaySJJbFtT6c2352Nzzc5x==5hCxczPLiiHGvcRrZ8aA1xPAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Review of: Characterization of Proposed Standards
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "<draft-kolkman-proposed-standards-clarified.all@tools.ietf.org>" <draft-kolkman-proposed-standards-clarified.all@tools.ietf.org>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@ericsson.com>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 23:31:05 -0000

> As nearly as I can tell, now, what's meant is to replace 6410 with the new
> document.  Please, please, please don't tell me that /portions/ of 6410 are
> being replaced.
>
> In any event, I've missed the logic for "updating", "replacing" or whatever
> 6410, if all of this isn't just being merged into 2026bis.

Sorry, yes: portions of 6410.

The point is that Section 4.1 of 2026 has become fragmented, with some
changes to it in 6410 and other changes to it here.  I'm proposing
addressing that fragmentation by making *this* document the definitive
place to get the information that used to be in 2026 Section 4.1.

Barry

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email