IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: RFC 8321 (Alternate-Marking Method for Passive and Hybrid Performance Monitoring) and RFC 8889 (Multipoint Alternate-Marking Method for Passive and Hybrid Performance Monitoring)to Proposed Standard

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Mon, 30 August 2021 04:25 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31BFD3A0652; Sun, 29 Aug 2021 21:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 4via5w_7bnIg; Sun, 29 Aug 2021 21:25:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D9C83A0646; Sun, 29 Aug 2021 21:25:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1mKYrQ-000539-T0; Mon, 30 Aug 2021 00:25:28 -0400
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2021 00:25:23 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
cc: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, last-call@ietf.org, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <BA07E4B42541B5A6542970D4@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <283542a3-3d19-dad3-a385-b99bb88dad19@gmail.com>
References: <163009842725.17742.16380067018932520158@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAC4RtVARJC-rs_+nCBB8yXkrwYQcwO313=FLnLMKNGRD-0ZC_A@mail.gmail.c om> <C852F58C18C7524F5478521E@PSB> <283542a3-3d19-dad3-a385-b99bb88dad19@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/Jqz6RD6uzqWp9Y3X38eX3bVsN3k>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: RFC 8321 (Alternate-Marking Method for Passive and Hybrid Performance Monitoring) and RFC 8889 (Multipoint Alternate-Marking Method for Passive and Hybrid Performance Monitoring)to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <last-call.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/last-call/>
List-Post: <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2021 04:25:37 -0000


--On Monday, August 30, 2021 14:23 +1200 Brian E Carpenter
<brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

> I also strongly concur. It is very close to trivial to issue
> these two documents as I-Ds with standards track boilerplate
> and give them a 4-week last call. That would conform to our
> process and avoid an extremely confused and confusing end
> state. A report on their experimental use would be a useful
> adjunct to that last call.
> 
> Maybe it would be quicker to use the normal downref mechanism,
> since draft-mirsky-bier-pmmm-oam wants it.

Brian,

A downref to a standards track document, especially one we
believe is stable (and maybe even deployed and interoperable)
but that no one has gone to the effort to advance is one thing.
Maybe I'm being over-rigid, but a downref to an explicitly
experimental document without even an experimental outcome
report seems to violate basic principles about stable
references.  

AFAIKT, no Last Call has been issued on draft-ietf-bier-pmmm-oam
(formerly draft-mirsky-bier-pmmm-oam).  Why not just spin up
I-Ds to replace RFCs 8321 and 8889 and do this in an orderly
fashion?  

   john

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email