Re: [mile] [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incident Object Description Exchange Format v2' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis-25.txt)
"Roman D. Danyliw" <rdd@cert.org> Wed, 05 October 2016 18:47 UTC
Return-Path: <rdd@cert.org>
X-Original-To: expand-draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@virtual.ietf.org
Delivered-To: mile@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 3345B129806; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:47:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: xfilter-draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xfilter-draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 167DE129808 for <xfilter-draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:47:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cert.org
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 DQIULQOaW9on for <xfilter-draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:47:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shetland.sei.cmu.edu (shetland.sei.cmu.edu [192.58.107.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 486D1129806 for <draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:47:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from timber.sei.cmu.edu (timber.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.21.23]) by shetland.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4/1543) with ESMTP id u95IkPSY026846; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 14:46:25 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cert.org; s=jthatj15xw2j; t=1475693185; bh=z/2SvvL1woRfF4T1TLLRcKU576s2XGjFnZpUYTTCDR0=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version:Sender: Reply-To; b=mvgkJDamyLTcvo4eEr32ywY+C4IFnX7gsUBB0ehUC+7Q6pB48PfbKZoIjTJJAq9kS SNA6UuOP50R6/xZHn7r58nbgKFgEhF8pXtBrhcp6RN6RU3qjjVQtOWpwfCYVagVb7W WuBa5VWcWj4Odk9+vXtRRQP6f7F+Ha+Z8lm3brjI=
Received: from CASCADE.ad.sei.cmu.edu (cascade.ad.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.28.248]) by timber.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4/1543) with ESMTP id u95IkNNX004851; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 14:46:23 -0400
Received: from MARATHON.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([10.64.28.250]) by CASCADE.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([10.64.28.248]) with mapi id 14.03.0279.002; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 14:46:22 -0400
From: "Roman D. Danyliw" <rdd@cert.org>
To: "drafts-approval@iana.org" <drafts-approval@iana.org>
Thread-Topic: [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incident Object Description Exchange Format v2' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis-25.txt)
Thread-Index: AQHSHmfCNpkOleliikCDco/p0CROfqCaM1KQ
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2016 18:46:22 +0000
Message-ID: <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFC0104E6B3A4@marathon>
References: <RT-Ticket-921487@icann.org> <20160803150200.6140.54785.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <rt-4.2.9-13550-1475602322-284.921487-7-0@icann.org>
In-Reply-To: <rt-4.2.9-13550-1475602322-284.921487-7-0@icann.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.64.22.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Resent-From: alias-bounces@ietf.org
Resent-To: rdd@cert.org, ncamwing@cisco.com, takeshi_takahashi@nict.go.jp, david.waltermire@nist.gov, Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com, stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie, mile-chairs@tools.ietf.org, mile@ietf.org
Resent-Message-Id: <20161005184731.3345B129806@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2016 11:47:31 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mile/ZaSREHZGJ8nb9IRxwn7nQ4DRY5M>
Cc: "draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mile] [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incident Object Description Exchange Format v2' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis-25.txt)
X-BeenThere: mile@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 05 Oct 2016 18:47:31 -0000
Good afternoon Amanda! I just pushed out at -26 to address one of the nits. This draft is ready to go. Sorry for the delay. Thank you for the feedback! Thanks, Roman > -----Original Message----- > From: Amanda Baber via RT [mailto:drafts-approval@iana.org] > Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 1:32 PM > Cc: draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietf.org > Subject: [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incident Object Description > Exchange Format v2' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis- > 25.txt) > > Hi Roman, > > This document is currently stuck with us. We need you to let us know > whether you want us to make changes now or wait to hear from the RFC > Editor (if you still want to make changes by then) during AUTH48. > > If you don't want to make any changes now, can we tell the RFC Editor the > registry actions are complete? > > thanks, > Amanda > > On Mon Aug 22 22:47:11 2016, amanda.baber wrote: > > Hi Roman, > > > > The reviewer writes, "Fixing schemaLocation in a spec makes the spec > > harder to consume. Implementations that want local copies to be used > > have to modify the doc to use it." > > > > thanks, > > Amanda > > > > On Mon Aug 22 20:24:38 2016, rdd@cert.org wrote: > > > Good afternoon Amanda! > > > > > > Coming back from vacation. > > > > > > Ack on this email and thank you for the review! > > > > > > (1) Let me check on the TimeZone issue. This was a requested change > > > from IESG review. > > > > > > (2) Could the reviewer share a bit more context on "schemaLocation" > > > not being a good idea. Is there a better way? > > > > > > I'd prefer to change now rather than AUTH48 if there is anything to > > > do. > > > > > > Roman > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Amanda Baber via RT [mailto:drafts-approval@iana.org] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 3:09 PM > > > > Cc: draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietf.org > > > > Subject: [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incident Object > > > > Description Exchange Format v2' to Proposed Standard > > > > (draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070- > > > > bis- > > > > 25.txt) > > > > > > > > Dear Roman, > > > > > > > > The actions for this document are complete. The designated expert > > > > for the XML registries, however, has comments: > > > > > > > > "It looks good. Two nits: > > > > > > > > schemaLocation attributes are a bad idea the definition of > > > > TimeZone allows for seconds, which is unnecessary (I think)" > > > > > > > > If you want to make changes during AUTH48, the RFC Editor will > > > > contact us and tell us which updates to make. Alternatively, if > > > > you want to make changes now, just let us know. > > > > > > > > Please review the actions below and let us know whether we've > > > > completed them correctly. When we receive your confirmation, we'll > > > > tell the RFC Editor the IANA actions are complete. > > > > > > > > ACTION 1: > > > > > > > > IANA has added the following entry to the IETF XML ns registry: > > > > > > > > iodef-2.0 > > > > urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:iodef-2.0 > > > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry/ns/iodef-2.0.txt > > > > [RFC-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis-25] > > > > > > > > Please see > > > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry > > > > > > > > > > > > ACTION 2: > > > > > > > > IANA has added the following entry to the IESG XML schema registry: > > > > > > > > iodef-2.0 > > > > urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:iodef-2.0 > > > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry/schema/iodef-2.0.xsd > > > > [RFC-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis-25] > > > > > > > > Please see > > > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry > > > > > > > > > > > > ACTION 3: > > > > > > > > IANA has created 34 registries under the "Incident Object > > > > Description > > > > Exchange Format v2 (IODEF)" heading at > > > > > > > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/iodef2 > > > > > > > > > > > > Can we tell the RFC Editor these are complete? > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > Amanda Baber > > > > IANA Lead Specialist > > > > ICANN > > > >
- [mile] [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incid… Amanda Baber via RT
- [mile] Protocol Action: 'The Incident Object Desc… The IESG
- Re: [mile] [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The I… Roman D. Danyliw
- [mile] [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incid… Amanda Baber via RT
- [mile] [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incid… Amanda Baber via RT
- [mile] [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incid… Amanda Baber via RT
- [mile] [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incid… Amanda Baber via RT
- [mile] [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incid… Amanda Baber via RT
- Re: [mile] [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The I… Roman D. Danyliw
- [mile] [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incid… Amanda Baber via RT
- [mile] [IANA #921487] Protocol Action: 'The Incid… Amanda Baber via RT