Re: [Mops] WG -- your very last chance! Re: Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Leslie (and Kyle, and most of all, Éric), as we line up for the parade
celebrating completion of the first MOPS WG chartered document,

Two things about this draft.

A quick peek at
https://github.com/ietf-wg-mops/draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons/issues/153
shows that the only remaining open issue for this draft is (ta-da!) from
Roman's comments on his IESG ballot. I would love for the editors to look
at that issue, which we have not done yet, and see if there's anything that
needs to be changed to reflect those comments.

I asked (begged?) the working group to take a look at the diffs from -10
(what left the working group, after AD evaluation) to -11 (the changes the
editors made between receiving comments on -10 and the I-D submission
cutoff before IETF 114),
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/114/materials/slides-114-mops-draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons-update-00>looking
especially at the changes highlighted in yellow on slide 3. The editors
continued to work on comment resolution during the submission "quiet
period" before IETF 114, so there are changes in the editor's copy in
Github that are not in -11. These are not major changes, but we didn't
point the working group at Compare Editor's Copy to WG Draft
<https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons&url2=https://github.com/ietf-wg-mops/draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons/raw/gh-pages/draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons.txt>,
and it would be good if people took a quick look at those changes as well.

Given these two points, could I suggest to Éric that he* wait until,
perhaps, next Friday, August 12, to push the button and send a -12 version
containing all of the changes in Github to the RFC Editor?* That would give
the working group a week from today, to look things over.

Do The Right Thing, of course ...

Best,

Spencer

On Fri, Aug 5, 2022 at 12:07 PM Leslie Daigle (ThinkingCat) <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Thanks, Éric!
>
> I will remind the WG that (as you will have seen in the minutes of IETF
> 114 MOPS WG meeting :^) ) there have been many improvements in the document
> as the authors have addressed the IESG and IETF last call input. These
> edits have been summarized to the WG list in the GitHub summaries each
> week, and you’ve seen the successive draft iterations.
>
> But, now is your very last moment (while Éric is enjoying a social evening
> :^) ) to provide input if you think the changes have introduced an issue in
> the document.
>
> Leslie.
>
> On 5 Aug 2022, at 12:57, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
>
> Thank Roman for having taken the time to review the -11 and to reflect on
> it.
>
>
>
> I will then approve shortly the I-D for publication after checking if
> everything has been addressed (social time here in Europe already so not in
> the next hour :-o )
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> -éric
>
>