IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Conclusion of the last call on draft-housley-two-maturity-levels

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Sun, 11 September 2011 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.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 3357321F8541 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 08:55:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.614
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.614 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 rkxSiPLKuEH6 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 08:55:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from odin.smetech.net (mail.smetech.net [208.254.26.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A6A21F853B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 08:55:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [208.254.26.81]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AC8CF240A5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 11:57:25 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net
Received: from odin.smetech.net ([208.254.26.82]) by localhost (ronin.smetech.net [208.254.26.81]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8eFyRq7IxEQg for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 11:57:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.107] (pool-96-231-29-247.washdc.fios.verizon.net [96.231.29.247]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2E08F24045 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 11:57:24 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Subject: Re: Conclusion of the last call on draft-housley-two-maturity-levels
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E6CA08B.3040407@piuha.net>
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 11:57:13 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D0F9B87E-B3DB-4241-8BEB-B71DF2D9A71C@vigilsec.com>
References: <20110728121904.2D22AD7A76F@newdev.eecs.harvard.edu> <4E5D4570.9080108@piuha.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20110902090159.09e97af0@resistor.net> <4E6147D4.2020204@santronics.com> <DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C352657343@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <20110906161108.GI31240@shinkuro.com> <CEDD8840-BE2D-405E-872A-271C25A9A59D@network-heretics.com> <01O5QFMUPV8S014O5Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <96633252-503F-4DCD-B6FD-B6B9DEA1FC66@network-heretics.com> <01O5RIOBEGP0014O5Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <201109100133.p8A1XFvS003894@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <4E6CA08B.3040407@piuha.net>
To: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
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: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 15:55:14 -0000

I think you will see that this question was discussed at least once.  We asked about moving to a one-level maturity model instead.  The conclusion was that it was possible to go from a two-level to a one-level in the future if that is appropriate.  However, if we go straight to a one-level now, and then learn that a two-level would have been better, we would be stuck.

Russ

On Sep 11, 2011, at 7:50 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:

> I personally view it as a tiny effort to remove an unused feature from our process. It could have removed two levels instead of one, but would that have made it easier or harder to find consensus for the change?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email