Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-11.txt> (Data Fields for In-situ OAM) to Proposed Standard

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Wed, 02 December 2020 15:32 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.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 9AF7C3A145C; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 07:32:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.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 sF7yD9kQq-28; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 07:32:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 295DE3A133A; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 07:32:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0122332.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 0B2FF1w7005706; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 15:32:02 GMT
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=VFZQQVYFWbJdxT32UWrBNqG2NeiCP25gjX7whAAgpYA=; b=M246BtUCKKUV32eECmnNfyOji9NP020Ilb8iEQAN7eBNdCnpaneODLJe9LL8EAgfswc+ 5QC/EdG9523rarY9Bnl6ZVlDOMDtTfX60e0Go7L+Bz7uHl4RJ1h+RkAuqyUcY+y3GRy8 VoXfG7Oj2vUVUrXhQr1HcBcTAZ8N3cPJqf71w7qAIr4ZJBqJe8VgU879ufP5niUZWfFc ffUJ4VY4rwtxSVA4BPiNE36U7wdoymWfPRIkqBm7MiAQnfphZZxpbugTaHkuc6B6mbS/ 1wpBQ/ZzJGPDaFcJAqJcOcRvn/SrpA9/4aXHxQZhjy/fjqaFihBfVnJCutdoHIS0MRzF CA==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint1 (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [184.51.33.18] (may be forged)) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 355v3rte3w-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Dec 2020 15:32:02 +0000
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0B2FJ2g2022016; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 10:32:00 -0500
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.34]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com with ESMTP id 353js30j9v-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Dec 2020 10:32:00 -0500
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 10:32:00 -0500
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.008; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 10:32:00 -0500
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com>, "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>
CC: "acm@research.att.com" <acm@research.att.com>, "ippm-chairs@ietf.org" <ippm-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data@ietf.org>, "ippm@ietf.org" <ippm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-11.txt> (Data Fields for In-situ OAM) to Proposed Standard
Thread-Index: AQHWwo8QJsQwQie6ikSnFK4edTSvbqnj/NIA///+nIA=
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 15:32:00 +0000
Message-ID: <52A201F5-A78A-4E71-99F2-7ADA7E467B6E@akamai.com>
References: <160624221011.1004.4337499034959566457@ietfa.amsl.com> <5FC76E4A.1000804@btconnect.com>
In-Reply-To: <5FC76E4A.1000804@btconnect.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.43.20110804
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.27.164.43]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <D0D15CD5DEE1724DB922017AF301086B@akamai.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.312, 18.0.737 definitions=2020-12-02_08:2020-11-30, 2020-12-02 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2012020094
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.312, 18.0.737 definitions=2020-12-02_08:2020-11-30, 2020-12-02 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2012020094
X-Agari-Authentication-Results: mx.akamai.com; spf=${SPFResult} (sender IP is 184.51.33.18) smtp.mailfrom=rsalz@akamai.com smtp.helo=prod-mail-ppoint1
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/QcPOSKm9zScw5xwC7o3VF-T-rQ8>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-11.txt> (Data Fields for In-situ OAM) 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: Wed, 02 Dec 2020 15:32:10 -0000

Let me comment on this. I've been one of the three TLS registry experts for a couple of years. TL;DR I think the draft is not in conflict with how things are done.


On 12/2/20, 5:37 AM, "tom petch" <daedulus@btconnect.com> wrote:

    This I-D seems at odds with RFC8126 over the use of Expert Review in s.8.7

    ' The responsible AD will appoinht ...'
    RFC8126 seems clear that the IESG appoints and may do so in advance and 
    having more than one is recommended

Well, the AD is part of the IESG. From what I have seen, registry experts are always appointed by the AD's, as they are expected to be the subject matter experts.

    'the expert will approve or deny..'
    RFC8126 seems clear that that is the role of IANA.  The expert 
    recommends and it is then up to IANA to act

IANA's actions are updating the registry. The expert(s) recommendations are binding.

>    'the expert can approve allocations.
    No, that is the role of IANA; early allocation is possible but that is 
    the decision of IANA.

If there's an expert, IANA will forward to the expert(s) and ask what to do.

I think reading Section 5 justifies my views above.  Perhaps 8126 is not internally consistent in some of these details.