IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Pete Resnick's Abstain on draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-16: (with COMMENT)

Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com> Wed, 22 January 2014 23:34 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 303A31A0514; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 15:34:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.836
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.836 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 lQTJ6H5OYaC2; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 15:34:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com (wolverine01.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.254]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 125AD1A0511; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 15:34:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qti.qualcomm.com; i=@qti.qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1390433659; x=1421969659; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pvbEskZec1mWWpb547iH0FFxCi+KuQbHsXFOMfZ9r9k=; b=gsNvT3kK0/v+gBJvmeunrNXh86sC9yH4Fkt3m55sfC10PSihm9RtT5RQ VcU4W2mwwYIG9e2nXJXIjzXMU8pZEuuYQ5MLAGvhPd82HfHDwHwr+6aCY h4Fmp7cYfsJXzoQfdGYdt2CCLVXExAJ21S3yDy4CA1W31YUBpCkHRnSYL k=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,7326"; a="9831986"
Received: from ironmsg03-r.qualcomm.com ([172.30.46.17]) by wolverine01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 22 Jan 2014 15:34:19 -0800
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,7326"; a="617832276"
Received: from nasanexhc04.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.48.17]) by Ironmsg03-R.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 22 Jan 2014 15:34:17 -0800
Received: from presnick-mac.local (172.30.48.1) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.48.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 15:34:17 -0800
Message-ID: <52E05577.4070204@qti.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 17:34:15 -0600
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100630 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pete Resnick's Abstain on draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-16: (with COMMENT)
References: <20140122192018.8692.82071.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <52E02C0C.7080901@si6networks.com> <52E0322C.1000301@qti.qualcomm.com> <52E03DCB.4060101@gont.com.ar> <52E03F1D.3000307@innovationslab.net> <47E8B622-5F85-414A-B266-87B0C998E4CD@gmail.com> <52E05292.4000301@qti.qualcomm.com> <C78BF609-2256-4043-A646-6C443906AFF4@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <C78BF609-2256-4043-A646-6C443906AFF4@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [172.30.48.1]
Cc: 6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org, Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>, ipv6@ietf.org, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>, draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses@tools.ietf.org, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 23:34:20 -0000

On 1/22/14 5:31 PM, Bob Hinden wrote:
> Pete,
>
> On Jan 22, 2014, at 3:21 PM, Pete Resnick<presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>  wrote:
>
>    
>> On 1/22/14 5:16 PM, Bob Hinden wrote:
>>      
>>> I have a question about what will happen if we agree to change it to Informational.  Will this require a new IETF last call, or sending it back to the working group and starting the process over?
>>>
>>>        
>> Nope. Going "down" in status just takes the wave of the IESG's magic wand. 2026, 6.1.2, paragraph 5.
>>      
> Good, then I don't object.  Better to get it through the process than argue over the IETF label.
>
> If there aren't objections from the w.g. then we can do that.
>    

But there might be objections from others on the IESG. That's why I 
ABSTAINed instead of DISCUSSed. I'm not willing to stand in the way 
either, even though I think the standards track outcome is not the right 
one.

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email