IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Mtgvenue] AD evaluation of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-10

Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com> Thu, 11 January 2018 03:18 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9ECD12E856 for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 19:18:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.01 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_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=qti.qualcomm.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 NWg1R8veetVp for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 19:18:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sabertooth01.qualcomm.com (sabertooth01.qualcomm.com [65.197.215.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC57812E855 for <mtgvenue@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 19:18:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qti.qualcomm.com; i=@qti.qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1515640683; x=1547176683; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ggm+CNJXEYY4pUZ/hlwxJ6601IIxMufIEsDzrzTNOpM=; b=g3LdoXVVP7RnFXtG8XqC0z0omDHRf81x8D7c7GVFNCLaclg23KEaXCfX FVY/S4kBGJ7S1z+6GLpf/7+dDH/vrqDTRdeoL5i80RPPjmtPDZ4uczf9m 8Q/F1KI6pIC/yXo6LICBD1tEjTXK7SnbXWb8Q9cv+vj9h5Y0SB48+8Ssi 4=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,343,1511856000"; d="scan'208";a="122164820"
Received: from unknown (HELO ironmsg01-sd.qualcomm.com) ([10.53.140.141]) by sabertooth01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 10 Jan 2018 19:18:02 -0800
X-MGA-submission: MDFtKCJXM9dCRXq2aC2B98uaGzxE/ieBGRXU7fmjFPVHxPK4fFH8NySV6gzXjkuTqrVphfXGNSaeBOSZ3ialGdtjN0KpKUjeyR0ik87e9EzK7/k1cY6bJHEByLzwz4GxKMrKy3uhuFP04KkrGhr7StQ9
Received: from nasanexm01f.na.qualcomm.com ([10.85.0.32]) by ironmsg01-sd.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 10 Jan 2018 19:18:01 -0800
Received: from [172.16.1.203] (10.80.80.8) by NASANEXM01F.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1293.2; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 19:18:00 -0800
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
To: Charles Eckel <eckelcu@cisco.com>
CC: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, mtgvenue@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 22:18:04 -0500
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.10r5443)
Message-ID: <2725131B-D120-4FA1-AE0F-9A083838E6E2@qti.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <B3585C21-417F-4467-A7A0-A99CA62BE871@cisco.com>
References: <5B74044C-11B9-422B-BE1B-8AB6892EEC46@cooperw.in> <20180105204121.x5ws6cugjljwp6ul@mx4.yitter.info> <FAFAA997-D421-4639-BF29-245E8BE23733@cooperw.in> <20180105211632.47v6dqyf5gxh6p2a@mx4.yitter.info> <96125a43-8f15-ebae-b135-8bc0674694cf@cisco.com> <B3585C21-417F-4467-A7A0-A99CA62BE871@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Originating-IP: [10.80.80.8]
X-ClientProxiedBy: NASANEXM01G.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.33) To NASANEXM01F.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.32)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mtgvenue/BRU9svY94A3i5IdDXj54WJ--cVo>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] AD evaluation of draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-10
X-BeenThere: mtgvenue@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for email discussion of the IAOC meeting venue selection process." <mtgvenue.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mtgvenue/>
List-Post: <mailto:mtgvenue@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 03:18:06 -0000

A quick thank you to Charles for covering my shepherding duties while I 
was away for a family matter. All looks good to me.

pr

On 9 Jan 2018, at 12:52, Charles Eckel (eckelcu) wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mtgvenue <mtgvenue-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of 
> "lear@cisco.com" <lear@cisco.com>
> Date: Friday, January 5, 2018 at 2:16 PM
> To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, "mtgvenue@ietf.org" 
> <mtgvenue@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] AD evaluation of 
> draft-ietf-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-10
>
>     Hi,
>
>
>     On 05.01.18 22:16, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>     > On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 03:59:44PM -0500, Alissa Cooper wrote:
>     >> Delete it? I don’t think this section aims to be complete in 
> any event.
>     > I'm for that.
>     >
>     >> Overall, Section 4 gives me some pause because some of it is 
> repeating material from BCP 101, and some of it seems to be enshrining 
> mechanics internal to IASA that should (IMO) be more flexible to 
> change than what would be required to update this document. I am 
> willing to defer to the WG consensus to keep the section, however, 
> which is why I didn’t mention this in my initial review.
>     >>
>     > I can't dig it out right now, but I seem to recall making an 
> earlier
>     > remark to the same effect.  I think the WG pushed back, but 
> maybe we
>     > need to revisit that.
>     >
>
>     I need the chairs' guidance before continuing.  I don't 
> specifically
>     recall a decision about that text as a whole, one way or another.
>
>     Eliot
>
> I do not recall past discussions about anything more than making minor 
> clarifications to this section. It has been in the draft since the 
> beginning:
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-mtgvenue-iaoc-venue-selection-process-00
>
> Looking through meeting minutes and email archives, I see no 
> discussions or debates about removing it.
>
> My opinion is that it is best to keep this section in the document. It 
> is possible that it will need to be updated to reflect changes that 
> occur as a result of IASA 2.0, but that is okay.
> The changes hashed out by Alissa and Brian later in this same thread 
> seem helpful at addressing the specific issue raised with this 
> section.
>
> Cheers,
> Charles

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email