Re: [ippm] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry & draft-ietf-ippm-metric-registry

["MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Tom,

During the five or more early reviews with IANA,
no one has said "On your bike". The very kind IANA
folks understand exactly what their responsibilities
are in this matter. Several of the early reviews
took place after RFC8126 was published. IANA guided
the proposal for a new urn.

Al


> -----Original Message-----
> From: tom petch [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 5:11 AM
> To: [e-mail]; Tommy Pauly <tpauly=[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail]; draft-ietf-ippm-metric-
> [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [ippm] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry &
> draft-ietf-ippm-metric-registry
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tommy Pauly" <tpauly=[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2019 4:22 PM
> 
> > Hello IPPM,
> >
> > We haven't received much feedback to the list on the metrics registry
> document. Please do take a look at the current revisions of the
> documents, and provide your opinion on whether or not the documents are
> ready to progress!
> 
> I shall probably regret this but my opinion is a firm Not Ready.
> 
> You are asking IANA to do what seems like an awful lot of work and
> making it more work than I think you have reason to do so IMHO e.g.
> 
> You are asking for urn: registrations but do not follow the procedure
> for registering a new urn:
> 
> You are asking for new somethings but do not use the terminology of
> RFC8126
> 
> In Initial Registry, your IANA Considerations say
>    IANA is requested to populate The Performance Metric Registry defined
>    in [I-D.ietf-ippm-metric-registry] with the values defined above.
> which seems to be asking IANA to trawl through some 78 pages to find
> some 24 references to IANA and try to understand what is being asked of
> them,
> while not using a template as is the custom.
> 
> If I was IANA, I would say, 'On your bike'; but knowing how IANA love
> rising to a challenge, they may well take it on - but if they do, I
> expect
> that the quality will suffer just because they are being asked
> to do so much
> 
> Tom Petch
> 
> > Best,
> > Tommy
> >
> > > On Jan 10, 2019, at 8:59 AM, Tommy Pauly <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello IPPM,
> > >
> > > This email starts our working group last call for the IPPM
> performance metrics registry, and the corresponding initial set of
> registry entries. The authors have indicated that they believe the
> documents are sufficiently mature and complete to go ahead. You can find
> the details on the documents here:
> > >
> > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dietf-2Dippm-2Dmetric-
> 2Dregistry_&d=DwIFAw&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=OfsSu8kTIltVyD1oL72cBw&m=Wm0u-
> hwAAYtSx5qwchwEEnyOjHdNSzRNiXgkOA2W2y4&s=AbiRn6baGSjRECN51G7QSKCcxG5VZBVyg
> GkWBHJ2GD0&e=
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dietf-2Dippm-2Dmetric-
> 2Dregistry_&d=DwIFAw&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=OfsSu8kTIltVyD1oL72cBw&m=Wm0u-
> hwAAYtSx5qwchwEEnyOjHdNSzRNiXgkOA2W2y4&s=AbiRn6baGSjRECN51G7QSKCcxG5VZBVyg
> GkWBHJ2GD0&e=>
> > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dietf-2Dippm-2Dinitial-
> 2Dregistry_&d=DwIFAw&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=OfsSu8kTIltVyD1oL72cBw&m=Wm0u-
> hwAAYtSx5qwchwEEnyOjHdNSzRNiXgkOA2W2y4&s=WTBWdz2_4Xd96ikAVC1fjDIfQKrK5gWQc
> 0wPVJ28Qvo&e=
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dietf-2Dippm-2Dinitial-
> 2Dregistry_&d=DwIFAw&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=OfsSu8kTIltVyD1oL72cBw&m=Wm0u-
> hwAAYtSx5qwchwEEnyOjHdNSzRNiXgkOA2W2y4&s=WTBWdz2_4Xd96ikAVC1fjDIfQKrK5gWQc
> 0wPVJ28Qvo&e=>
> > >
> > > Since these are quite large documents, we'll be doing an extended
> adoption call, for several weeks, to give everyone a chance to
> thoroughly read the documents. Please provide your feedback by Friday,
> February 8, 2019.
> > >
> > > Please send your review comments to [e-mail]
> <mailto:[e-mail]>, indicating whether you believe the draft is
> ready to send up to the IESG and if not, why not.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Tommy (as IPPM co-chair)
> >
> >
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> 
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > ippm mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_ippm&d=DwIFAw&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=OfsSu8kTIltVyD1oL72cBw&m=Wm0u-
> hwAAYtSx5qwchwEEnyOjHdNSzRNiXgkOA2W2y4&s=br9su24KnXra7yiyf2HRRIhyUXmDlefGs
> nuyprDmvqw&e=
> >