IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-halpern-gendispatch-consensusinformational-02.txt> (IETF Stream Documents Require IETF Rough Consensus) to Best Current Practice

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Sat, 25 January 2020 02:20 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 215A3120227 for <last-call@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 18:20:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 ss_bbgat-e2h for <last-call@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 18:20:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x236.google.com (mail-lj1-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::236]) (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 246D81200D8 for <last-call@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 18:20:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x236.google.com with SMTP id y4so4732164ljj.9 for <last-call@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 18:20:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/tcorASUuuX9dO+7y8HVOqLSugFBLb8X4mQPlBudrRM=; b=wqDLrjd2Rw7M3nKFmeTtY45iB4Ku2KmJly/gkjAvQS7640rnq+ASgSP48JIuN/9WLx wpqFkhAFGxPr7jKUx+3VISMkZWNoIFkF2wTUdb3OsVVq5tRweNK8VAs08IB7zc8xq5CU JaRpxNqCFlMKGvsGKI4OxObZctexhBRsCKkX38v/ihqIi15pec7dbi+EJSI50/B6XlHa c6uxOrLlqjo55xAU7N7ur2aEg8KD01hecvtFuFPMdYwxbI2V5qU6bv6zxdtmmyfdtf5H dfbFFX/HdQi4FMg+sa0htYr7Whot7zSUioFyYn0JGGz4qi6F8PGL17GvXV/v71i7gFba RhFQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/tcorASUuuX9dO+7y8HVOqLSugFBLb8X4mQPlBudrRM=; b=Iqvgcfr7XS5AKvyUlYk9bTg3m1lJoTYwxleiNexTp1Oc8bRigRGbWi2jCrTxIr4Tq6 Ja3r9ltPXvORcjEdx55aOGTbilupBOVcNMDmb2FNxNHjGgX013PY11qNmvqJqjcCEQZK 1S+TWx/T1BeKXbB24wwFzw0N/gpw52ey1sBlgnO/AHWutKsrvoCnAz7LmFVrsM9O5g+w R6Ryj2XsAtGiLGWyMjTKozZvac963jLYdW567C9WD9jq+vpZ0eoLNrwCxNmAN0onaiW1 zZmTNHiG+03p8RIddmC1fNoRdjW2+O+E6RZiYQAzySPtJTlFnbskN7UcvCn6nI046IUG kacA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXXhKIeQC/mvFWEz0U/kVeUDiZyPnB7h8ZsUbt3ALab6aQI9JQQ EqVKumcOENdUwDvlsW+tFDjMGABB8Mbi/Sm4VQDr8w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwlOB/pxzsLgDydp0W60cbURE8WQSz6v+mJS5JlmGBVTANstIPyRWt0aU4H8Q0L/vt+tvMHAOqtkZspeOWu1aY=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:448:: with SMTP id g8mr4001824ljg.35.1579918854339; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 18:20:54 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAChr6Sy5-ejdjw5zgZgiF1hSyuiAErmas-dbWFmx1b+1vftT1Q@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBOMVYpEYaEUzYsa0ApDfGtA6oD5P67A40=HQVBN+yTuKQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAChr6Sz7vihWaoeG8H11JzQ5YqrbYLPLneuY3PD4syMYEaKQ4w@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBMeuPQnUtOvxxscN2Si+s5ntx11RE-fRQararL+ePmDXA@mail.gmail.com> <CAChr6SzWpbJksfAD5bEQ5q+OApVBgMU5PZzniyYncex8R70Jeg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAChr6SzWpbJksfAD5bEQ5q+OApVBgMU5PZzniyYncex8R70Jeg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 18:20:17 -0800
Message-ID: <CABcZeBN7Lqyv3M2vpctYkKSpA1gr4ptssqJ3Q4HKbB1MtfiiBg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
Cc: draft-halpern-gendispatch-consensusinformational@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001651aa059ced86d3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/P7bpsxNO_RarhQ_IrP9XZPhNZHc>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-halpern-gendispatch-consensusinformational-02.txt> (IETF Stream Documents Require IETF Rough Consensus) to Best Current Practice
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: Sat, 25 Jan 2020 02:20:59 -0000

On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 5:54 PM Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 5:49 PM Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> Maybe I'm confused about this, or shouldn't have used the term "discuss
>>> criteria" (though [0] contained the term, as well as the section on
>>> "Document Classes Reviewed by the IESG").
>>>
>>
>> All of these document classes apply only to the IETF stream.
>>
>
> Then where do "Document Actions (from RFC-Editor)" originate?
>

My mistake. The DISCUSS criteria only apply to Protocol actions.

"Protocol Actions are naturally subject to greater scrutiny than Document
Actions; Area Directors are not even required to state a position on a
Document Action (the default being "No Objection"). Accordingly, the exact
criteria used to evaluate Protocol Actions would benefit from greater
scrutiny. The remainder of this document focuses on the use of DISCUSS for
standards-track and BCP documents."

-Ekr



> thanks,
> Rob
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email