[ippm] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry-14: (with COMMENT)
Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 03 December 2019 22:33 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A241812003F; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 14:33:57 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry@ietf.org, Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch>, ippm-chairs@ietf.org, ippm@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.111.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <157541243765.4760.10404134824479029590.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2019 14:33:57 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/rjcdKqfzx1g7bxMRPUlPZhIW3N0>
Subject: [ippm] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry-14: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 03 Dec 2019 22:33:57 -0000
Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry-14: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I have a significant issue related to the approval of this initial registry, and then a minor point. (1) This is the significant issue: §2: This document defines the initial set of Performance Metrics Registry entries, for which IETF approval (following development in the IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) Working Group) will satisfy the requirement for Expert Review. Most are Active Performance Metrics, which are based on RFCs prepared in the IPPM working group of the IETF, according to their framework [RFC2330] and its updates. s/IETF approval/IESG Approval There is no "IETF approval" policy in rfc8126. Even though it is self-serving for this document to provide guidance on the approval for the new registry entries, I think that it should be possible to do so using IESG Approval given that these initial entries into the new registry have been reviewed by the WG. However, draft-ietf-ippm-metric-registry only explicitly talks about using Specification Required (including Expert Review), and it makes no exceptions. This document should not make statements about criteria used for this initial registration, so §2 should be deleted. draft-ietf-ippm-metric-registry should be explicit about the initial population of the registry. I am them balloting DISCUSS on that other document to address the approval of the initial registry entries in this document. (2) Minor point: §1: "The process in [I-D.ietf-ippm-metric-registry] also requires that new entries are administered by IANA through Expert Review or IETF Standards action, which will ensure that the metrics are tightly defined." The registration policy defined in I-D.ietf-ippm-metric-registry is "Specification Required", which requires the review of an expert.
- [ippm] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf… Alvaro Retana via Datatracker
- Re: [ippm] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-… MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
- Re: [ippm] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-… Alvaro Retana