Re: [mile] early AD-review of draft-ietf-mile-template

Sean Trner <turners@ieca.com> Wed, 09 May 2012 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <turners@ieca.com>
X-Original-To: mile@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mile@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 707E821F847F for <mile@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 May 2012 08:55:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.734
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.734 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.865, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rIKx5Sujlu+O for <mile@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 May 2012 08:55:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gateway16.websitewelcome.com (gateway16.websitewelcome.com [69.93.82.10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D260521F8463 for <mile@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 May 2012 08:55:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gateway16.websitewelcome.com (Postfix, from userid 5007) id 4EE6C5440A0CF; Wed, 9 May 2012 10:55:13 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from gator1743.hostgator.com (gator1743.hostgator.com [184.173.253.227]) by gateway16.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40C045440A08E for <mile@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 May 2012 10:55:13 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from [64.134.100.254] (port=49774 helo=[192.168.5.56]) by gator1743.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <turners@ieca.com>) id 1SS9EP-00063C-2H; Wed, 09 May 2012 10:55:13 -0500
References: <4F999FB4.5070403@ieca.com> <4DE7695F-C053-4676-A313-DA08652082C6@tik.ee.ethz.ch> <4FAA81D2.8050802@ieca.com> <B037668C-B6FA-486A-B1A2-FB6F04F4FFC6@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
In-Reply-To: <B037668C-B6FA-486A-B1A2-FB6F04F4FFC6@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="sha1"; boundary="Apple-Mail-EB8165ED-30B2-4E87-9C71-19596BC54165"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"
Message-Id: <A31D5C9F-F47C-447D-91DA-247B68CA66FD@ieca.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (9B206)
From: Sean Trner <turners@ieca.com>
Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 11:55:10 -0400
To: Brian Trammell <trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator1743.hostgator.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - ieca.com
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: ip-64-134-100-254.public.wayport.net ([192.168.5.56]) [64.134.100.254]:49774
X-Source-Auth: sean.turner@ieca.com
X-Email-Count: 6
X-Source-Cap: ZG9tbWdyNDg7ZG9tbWdyNDg7Z2F0b3IxNzQzLmhvc3RnYXRvci5jb20=
Cc: "mile@ietf.org" <mile@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mile] early AD-review of draft-ietf-mile-template
X-BeenThere: mile@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Managed Incident Lightweight Exchange, IODEF extensions and RID exchanges" <mile.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mile>, <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mile>
List-Post: <mailto:mile@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mile>, <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 15:55:21 -0000

Absolutely.

Spt

Sent from my iPhone

On May 9, 2012, at 11:47 AM, Brian Trammell <trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch> wrote:

> 
> On May 9, 2012, at 4:40 PM, Sean Turner wrote:
> 
>>>> 12) A.8 and A.9 and I guess all appendices in this draft, should we require that they explicitly be marked as normative parts of the document?
>>> 
>>> A.8 and A.9 are weird, in that they're appendices within an appendix. Examples are definitely informative. The XML schema should be normative; however, technically, I would presume it's the schema that goes into the IANA registry (which, of course, in the normal case, gets taken from the schema in Appendix A of an extension document) which is normative.
>> 
>> So I guess adding a sentence in A.8/A.9 to say something like "When the draft is produced this Appendix should be marked as normative" and "When the draft is produced this Appendix should be marked as informative" would work for me.
> 
> Okay, that makes sense. (As I've already submitted an -04, would it be okay to hold this for -05 pending other IESG commentary, presuming there's nothing else that needs to be done before then?)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Brian (author hat)
>