Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-02
Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> Mon, 01 August 2016 04:58 UTC
Return-Path: <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7962112D1AE; Sun, 31 Jul 2016 21:58:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 bnHm0WgCUx9p; Sun, 31 Jul 2016 21:58:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x229.google.com (mail-wm0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDA8C12D1A4; Sun, 31 Jul 2016 21:58:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x229.google.com with SMTP id q128so50971069wma.1; Sun, 31 Jul 2016 21:58:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xjo1l1knZuvp3MhEuMGHTvSy8Pmq1C9YHgVoNYAWMMM=; b=FIYD6LRnKJ6a3Dfn1qP6Q19OnO4F8gdSVgwv1cwckAYgaIHBhjQErIpS7U5kXY/dHN 3Sl+bkOXzEatloLTMppiLNu+HzQrL3jZB20s5Z1BwbbVDP7GPmjM+LcSktP7kTiYMJkp jqhDn4AeW7Ny4N7/z4+06SMsSaUoVjqPiSGZb3wk0GVlci6PrlhIcwuRoKms3Mnyna2n QAv2Al0698RQK+9PB9laf1dA1+WUrY6PYXHhFQxXcV0T7euzXlpcSB9+QyTKgRLQGjKY +KFOBKstJahaAyQyUfotZWVwvobSJEDKEt8AVD9UXzb67kzYLHJzBUdh8og4varbyDxV GM/A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xjo1l1knZuvp3MhEuMGHTvSy8Pmq1C9YHgVoNYAWMMM=; b=aV7sG5s1RM8aiybydVTr269MEDxSu6Z6qXEZkRwuqibmrwdPH8S15u7lR70eWUOdY5 sBWSkmWGBAzHD47jlDnRbqYmdmVhV1fSVBLydVhPH0FV8mv3LBh1PkRRWAgYYqeMkU/w AfDyIiPbRnRWd6eft2fkjmv1j2A/hvx7tCcs3VH69I+zh3jtCFmreumF3TBPGJmpEFWI aOGdd8ce+r/SxKsNc6nopJlvG/Nwt+bfpN4zTVpgZb0tAanrDikQlcBCXG5HMrP4uyAt ZowUnrUX2afyDmoUPjbBlF8aXU9eM0NkvJB7iKDJowOx809h5ShbWg9xeZoREzBRDSah T7bA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouseaDgtNnqy9iZdKtTziUtDPbCwVATpipjz4o2toragwg6lJy+3JfMM7ElYXogJiQ==
X-Received: by 10.195.18.170 with SMTP id gn10mr49447527wjd.46.1470027507163; Sun, 31 Jul 2016 21:58:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.79] (124.25.176.95.rev.sfr.net. [95.176.25.124]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id qe2sm28520867wjc.28.2016.07.31.21.58.25 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 31 Jul 2016 21:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>
References: <CDD4C92E-863F-40FE-8D58-D764C9533FAA@cisco.com> <4c9504d3-c212-0b8c-0016-b31d653f15a6@gmail.com> <9E2C2681-B776-444F-84DC-9A28130DB2C1@cisco.com> <77e8ce0f-ceb3-0b69-54eb-635afbdf2a17@gmx.de> <ac67f171-d8b0-f6c6-f7db-d58c01c4505f@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <881fe29a-71fc-8012-6488-c823f0ebfbbf@gmail.com>
From: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1364632d-a951-4c86-cd96-35982fbb670c@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2016 06:58:24 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <881fe29a-71fc-8012-6488-c823f0ebfbbf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/86MJcUiYZVaX0K7zbrla8D_ZieA>
Cc: "draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis.all@ietf.org>, "Matt Miller (mamille2)" <mamille2@cisco.com>, "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-02
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <json.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/json/>
List-Post: <mailto:json@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2016 04:58:36 -0000
On 2016-08-01 03:22, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > I don't think that trust enters into the equation here. The obvious solution is removing the ECMA reference. Not because "The IETF has a problem with ECMA", but because the idea of having two organizations being authoritative/normative for a standard is pointless unless they work together on a single document. ECMA should consider referencing the RFC instead of duplicating it. Anders > > A standards document, be it from IETF, or from some other organization, should > be complete before being considered for final review. This is not the case > for draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-02 because one of its normative references > is not available for review in the form that it needs to be to support > draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-02. Trust in ECMA or WG chairs or ADs is no > substitute for having an actual document to review. > > If there is trust involved it would be trusting that ECMA doesn't turn around > and remove the reciprocal language in a future revision of ECMA-404. > > peter > > > On 07/30/2016 03:13 AM, Martin J. Dürst wrote: >> I think this is an issue of trust, from both sides. For those not in a mood to >> trust ECMA, I suggest they trust our WG chairs and ADs. >> >> (If everything goes really wrong, we can always issue a revision with the >> reference to the ECMA side removed.) >> >> Regards, Martin. >> >> On 2016/07/29 01:13, Julian Reschke wrote: >>> On 2016-07-28 18:05, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote: >>>> I agree that the document should not be published as an RFC until we >>>> have the equivalent last-call doc from ECMA, and we do a coordinated >>>> publish of the two documents. But having our side ready to go, >>>> including finishing AUTH48, will allow us to not be the bottleneck in >>>> that process. >>> >>> Not sure. "approved" means "approved". I believe we need a mechanism >>> that makes sure that the update of 404 not only happens, but that it >>> also contains the change we expect. >>> >>>> I believe we have adequate protections in place with Alexey not >>>> pushing the button until the right time, and making sure that the RFC >>>> Production Center is aware of the dependency to what amounts to a >>>> downref. >>>> >>>> Would it help if we replaced the ECMA-404 reference with a a ref to >>>> ECMA-404bis (with details left out)? That would make it *very* clear >>>> to the RPC what we intend, and would trigger processes they have in >>>> place to ensure the reference is resolved before publishing. >>> >>> I think that helps, but it's not sufficient. >>> >>> Best regards, Julian >>> >>> PS: ...and we need a minor revision anyway; see prior feedback. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> json mailing list >>> json@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json >>> . >>> > > _______________________________________________ > json mailing list > json@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json >
- [Json] Early AD review of draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Rob Sayre
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Anders Rundgren
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Peter F. Patel-Schneider
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Stefan Hagen
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Peter F. Patel-Schneider
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Peter F. Patel-Schneider
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Peter F. Patel-Schneider
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Matt Miller (mamille2)
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Anders Rundgren
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Anders Rundgren
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Peter F. Patel-Schneider
- [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-json… Matt Miller (mamille2)
- Re: [Json] Early AD review of draft-ietf-jsonbis-… Barry Leiba
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Json] Early AD review of draft-ietf-jsonbis-… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] Early AD review of draft-ietf-jsonbis-… Manger, James