[ippm] WG adoption call for RFC8321bis and 8889bis

Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com> Fri, 08 April 2022 00:03 UTC

Return-Path: <tpauly@apple.com>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28F0B3A1068 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 17:03:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.108
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tsXdpYCl3Fg1 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 17:03:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp01.apple.com (ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp01.apple.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1200F3A1A4D for <ippm@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 17:03:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp01.apple.com []) by ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp01.apple.com ( with SMTP id 237NrfR8037377 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 17:03:40 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=apple.com; h=from : content-type : mime-version : subject : date : references : to : in-reply-to : message-id; s=20180706; bh=Es4I1ckv317wDkB74LxMsntByOE/iN6t6z2vmtY1yeY=; b=Z1UyQMw2AZhZg++P9OUtF6/KpYbreeW5/0ieV/ZH08eqEQPoEY4UJKzqPIZTd615NtO/ ScCyabaoRDNZmz7or43ocbZglXyEMegHrkfhotG7afApZi3mgvfehRi5dObBZVHQ2MTE S9ijJXmMuY41ldNNUZxOGSfP3Hip/5KNW9mqMNPIGZIxfEXaxkkYaF1C7SGsL5lG8c6/ AIFUML0Bs+S3X9Ic/t4J5T2Pu96oQy7bNOJhnej/59ok6AddE6PsuPD6SYNjPjiPFbfd VmKSSJWjb6cEBj23wo5FS0cDdI+fbC6thbxkOdebJx2LRLSYclT7z3/h/z6l7TuBX8+r pg==
Received: from rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp01.rno.apple.com (rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp01.rno.apple.com []) by ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp01.apple.com with ESMTP id 3f6n53v8vk-12 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for <ippm@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Apr 2022 17:03:40 -0700
Received: from rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp03.rno.apple.com (rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp03.rno.apple.com []) by rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp01.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 64bit (built Jan 18 2022)) with ESMTPS id <0R9Z00YJEUU1QBD0@rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp01.rno.apple.com> for ippm@ietf.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2022 17:03:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from process_milters-daemon.rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp03.rno.apple.com by rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp03.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 64bit (built Jan 18 2022)) id <0R9Z00C00UP0KD00@rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp03.rno.apple.com> for ippm@ietf.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2022 17:03:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Va-T-CD: 723948813aed79c947a23a6f942d2d0e
X-Va-E-CD: 81f78f8050c5c47e78b69b001724a0a7
X-Va-R-CD: 033249b39baa740b3645b9579a489293
X-Va-CD: 0
X-Va-ID: 663cb629-418e-4fb6-ac14-4e4fe1184361
X-V-T-CD: 723948813aed79c947a23a6f942d2d0e
X-V-E-CD: 81f78f8050c5c47e78b69b001724a0a7
X-V-R-CD: 033249b39baa740b3645b9579a489293
X-V-CD: 0
X-V-ID: 0a05823b-8b80-43fd-aa5e-93d1211d0aa6
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.425, 18.0.858 definitions=2022-04-07_05:2022-04-07, 2022-04-07 signatures=0
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown []) by rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp03.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 64bit (built Jan 18 2022)) with ESMTPSA id <0R9Z00F4EUU1QE00@rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp03.rno.apple.com> for ippm@ietf.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2022 17:03:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F3ECEFD9-C1FF-44A6-81E6-93ADCB3854C1"
MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.100.1\))
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2022 17:03:36 -0700
References: <CAM4esxQHrH7onttT6MV+DGuM24cQW99pZ83wOAK_88BcAP43Rw@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <CAM4esxQHrH7onttT6MV+DGuM24cQW99pZ83wOAK_88BcAP43Rw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-id: <17AA8D9D-CDEC-4CF3-938A-4280CE08A51A@apple.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.100.1)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.425, 18.0.858 definitions=2022-04-07_05:2022-04-07, 2022-04-07 signatures=0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/J0n48iDyEa3IN3INg583Bmv5-ao>
Subject: [ippm] WG adoption call for RFC8321bis and 8889bis
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2022 00:03:44 -0000

Hello IPPM,

This email starts an adoption call for draft-fioccola-rfc8321bis and draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis. Please see Martin’s emails below for details — the main idea here is that we’re moving two IPPM RFCs from Experimental to Proposed Standard.

The chairs would like to have a short amount of time spent in the WG processing these documents. If we adopt, we’d plan to very shortly thereafter do a working group last call.

Please reply to this email by Thursday, April 21 and indicate if you support adopting this document.

Tommy & Marcus

> On Apr 7, 2022, at 1:16 PM, Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello IPPM,
> You may recall that there was a need to progress RFC8321 and RFC8889 from Experimental to Proposed Standard. There was a feeling that the update would be trivial and we could therefore do it as an AD sponsored document.
> I've done 3 rounds of AD review and I've seen the need to substantially adjust the scope of these documents and tweak the design in places. The changes are not revolutionary, but I'm a non-practitioner and have driven some design changes with minimal review. At this point I think it's important to get good IPPM review; if we're going to do that anyway, we might as well do the (expedited) working group process so that there's no confusion as to why IPPM didn't formally review an update to its own documents.
> So, as first step, I invite the working group to adopt these two drafts:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fioccola-rfc8321bis/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fioccola-rfc8321bis/>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis/>
> Any objections to adoption, as always, should be to the value of doing the work at all, and the general direction of the drafts. I hope to follow up the adoption call with an immediate WGLC to shake out any detailed objections, though we will take as long as we need to address concerns that people have.
> I invite you to consult the changelogs on both of these documents, which are not long, to get a sense of what we've done.
> For those of you who like diffs, there was a big reorganization between draft-02 and -03 that is hard to follow in a diff. So here is a set of diffs that exclude the -02 to -03 transition:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=rfc8321.txt&url2=draft-fioccola-rfc8321bis-02.txt <https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=rfc8321.txt&url2=draft-fioccola-rfc8321bis-02.txt>
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-fioccola-rfc8321bis-03.txt&url2=draft-fioccola-rfc8321bis-04.txt <https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-fioccola-rfc8321bis-03.txt&url2=draft-fioccola-rfc8321bis-04.txt>
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=rfc8889.txt&url2=draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis-02.txt <https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=rfc8889.txt&url2=draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis-02.txt>
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis-03.txt&url2=draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis-04.txt <https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis-03.txt&url2=draft-fioccola-rfc8889bis-04.txt>
> I believe it's up to the chairs to start the adoption call. If people are good about reading the document during WGLC, I would like to think we could be done before IETF 114.
> Your friendly Area Director,
> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> ippm mailing list
> ippm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm