Re: [Insipid] One week LC for draft-ietf-insipid-session-id-26

"Ben Campbell" <ben@nostrum.com> Thu, 11 August 2016 03:55 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: insipid@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: insipid@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDDC112D72A for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 20:55:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.147
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 5wwY-S_cF8w3 for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 20:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A725E12D1ED for <insipid@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 20:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.4] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u7B3tadN097940 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 10 Aug 2016 22:55:37 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.4]
From: "Ben Campbell" <ben@nostrum.com>
To: "Gonzalo Salgueiro" <gsalguei@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 22:55:36 -0500
Message-ID: <5AA91BA6-CF5E-47F5-AF46-2096534F3DF3@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <13891FC2-AAC9-4FDB-9ADA-0F0ABB7D0C23@cisco.com>
References: <13891FC2-AAC9-4FDB-9ADA-0F0ABB7D0C23@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.4r5234)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/insipid/0wk74VndN5bODdbXBjopqy13MNo>
Cc: Paul Giralt <pgiralt@cisco.com>, "insipid@ietf.org" <insipid@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Insipid] One week LC for draft-ietf-insipid-session-id-26
X-BeenThere: insipid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Session-ID discussion list <insipid.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/insipid>, <mailto:insipid-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/insipid/>
List-Post: <mailto:insipid@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:insipid-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid>, <mailto:insipid-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 03:55:41 -0000

On 10 Aug 2016, at 22:50, Gonzalo Salgueiro (gsalguei) wrote:

> INSIPID WG -
>
> The definition of communication session in 
> draft-ietf-insipid-session-id references the reader to RFC 7206:
>
> 3.  Session Identifier Requirements and Use Cases
>
>    Requirements and use cases for the end-to-end Session Identifier,
>    along with a definition of "session identifier" and "communication
>    session", can be found in [RFC7206].
>
> There was a comment during Gen-ART review that this should be a 
> normative reference.  The authors and AD are all in agreement this 
> should indeed be a normative reference.  As a result, since RFC 7206 
> is informative rather than standards track, this has created a 
> downref.
>
> Thus, as per BCP 97 (RFC 3967), we are initiating a one week Last Call 
> on draft-ietf-insipid-session-id-26 (which now normatively references 
> Informational RFC 7206).  If there are any issues with this change 
> please raise them on the list.

Please note that this is a repeated IETF last call, not a WGLC. Please 
also copy any comments to ietf@ietf.org. (Or directly to the IESG if for 
some reason you don't want to send them the the entire IETF.)

Thanks!

Ben.