IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] WGLC for draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc8229bis

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 10 November 2021 20:13 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 640F23A131D for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 12:13:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 49V7tTh3rVU0 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 12:13:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [176.58.120.209]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26D843A13EE for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 12:13:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dooku.sandelman.ca (cpef81d0f835a73-cmf81d0f835a70.sdns.net.rogers.com [174.115.215.42]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 070721F47B; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 20:13:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dooku.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id E30411A0548; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 15:13:24 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Valery Smyslov <smyslov.ietf@gmail.com>, ipsec@ietf.org
In-reply-to: <00ba01d7d574$4f6daf70$ee490e50$@gmail.com>
References: <24969.30411.814431.153696@fireball.acr.fi> <32581.1636466403@localhost> <00ba01d7d574$4f6daf70$ee490e50$@gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "Valery Smyslov" <smyslov.ietf@gmail.com> message dated "Tue, 09 Nov 2021 17:15:54 +0300."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7.1; GNU Emacs 26.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 15:13:24 -0500
Message-ID: <398202.1636575204@dooku>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/IKZC5vJtgi4fdVl_yVU0j_KeUzA>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] WGLC for draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc8229bis
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 20:13:37 -0000

Valery Smyslov <smyslov.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
    >> I wonder about keeping more of the original authors on the new
    >> document, since it is substantively the same document.  I can not
    >> judge what their contribution was to the original document, nor do I
    >> know if they were asked.  If the design team has gone through this
    >> consideration, then that's enough for me.

    > All three original authors were asked to co-author the draft.  Tommy
    > agreed, but no reply was received from Samy and Ravi.  I cannot judge
    > their contribution to the original rfc, but I think that it's a good
    > idea to add them to acknowledgement section anyway. Will do this.

Glad to hear you had that discussion. My issue is closed :-)

Please consider using the xml-v3 contributor mechanism.
If you are using Kramdown, then it's just like the author: section, but you
say "contributor:"

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email