Re: IESG Statement on surprised authors

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Sun, 31 May 2015 15:20 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8440B1A00F9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 May 2015 08:20:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 Q7hqp_Idjs1S for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 May 2015 08:20:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E25C1A00EA for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 May 2015 08:20:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1674; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1433085652; x=1434295252; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to; bh=6Kz6xuIcwI4h9OdgVTNxbF2mHHPw5LwpPappnkJ9TDk=; b=TT8onRIOsdnS0JSHEELPhKkoWcxQ0duWJriUr3c5frCc1Xe0IEWWRqOl QBkZ+PxWc/CHUOZKV5rYgnB1GunOvRX6cnnX0hmvHjqaIoCEqRVOyPfSh v0zaU4PzwQMx8uiFg9Bbbw3U+QEAyfwxk6PiQjR0vDo6JxIT3cvwWJB1N M=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 481
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CsAwCTJWtV/xbLJq1ch2C7IAmHUQKBWhQBAQEBAQEBgQqEIwEBBCNVEQsYCRYLAgIJAwIBAgFFBgEMCAEBiCmxVqMrAQEBAQEBAQMBAQEBAQEBG4tDhQ2CaIFFAQSVHIFDhz2HeI86I2GDGTyCeAEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,526,1427760000"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="500457748"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 31 May 2015 15:20:50 +0000
Received: from [10.61.71.33] (ams3-vpn-dhcp1825.cisco.com [10.61.71.33]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t4VFKnmu002891; Sun, 31 May 2015 15:20:50 GMT
Message-ID: <556B26D0.7020405@cisco.com>
Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 17:20:48 +0200
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: IESG Statement on surprised authors
References: <20150529205551.22495.73800.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2F99A0C05DFEE698A643FC97@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <938E070C-A69A-4D37-9B33-3CB07E09595C@piuha.net> <5568F568.9060407@bogus.com> <5568FE28.1090600@gmail.com> <55695D53.3000004@cisco.com> <E3C9C304-EFA2-4C47-AC57-354BEDDC1984@umn.edu> <981C94AECB2DFB46F0990A84@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <CAKKJt-fw_AtNoAJRi62Q5yzkUyYEUXH7L+dwVy6c=xsX2ToADA@mail.gmail.com> <532882A8F7829F80DB25BB19@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <556ACBE1.3050104@cisco.com> <556AE4DD.3000903@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <556AE4DD.3000903@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0sQXP3U5puP3AdIo5kC21IVtj9ArqbhIV"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ucnQ-tbPH-7lkgtMBRQkp5klSbM>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Sun, 31 May 2015 15:20:53 -0000


On 5/31/15 12:39 PM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> Den 31. mai 2015 10:52, skrev Eliot Lear:
> > Whereas I take issue with the IESG (and IAB) making statements
> > that should be handled (a) through our normative processes and
> > document series; and (b) where there should be certain standards
> > across our document series, and this is one of them.
>
> Now this statement is about Internet-Drafts, not about the RFC series
> or any substream thereof.

...
>
> I don't think we've figured out that yet. And it's a separate topic.

I think there's a pretty simple answer to this question, but perhaps
you're right that it should be dealt with separately.  But it should be
dealt with - and not just by the IESG.

Eliot