IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [newtrk] Re: IESG comments on draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-02.txt

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Thu, 12 January 2006 10:45 UTC

Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EwzxW-0006bG-8s for newtrk-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 05:45:34 -0500
Received: from mailapps.uoregon.edu (mailapps.uoregon.edu [128.223.142.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA08675 for <newtrk-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 05:44:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailapps.uoregon.edu (IDENT:U2FsdGVkX1+QCXwAgzttZ4tgMoTo1hoohhm7181oPVc@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailapps.uoregon.edu (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k0CAeZTC009229; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:40:35 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by mailapps.uoregon.edu (8.13.5/8.13.5/Submit) id k0CAeZTX009228; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:40:35 -0800
Received: from sj-iport-3.cisco.com (sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.72]) by mailapps.uoregon.edu (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k0CAeYOl009221 for <newtrk@lists.uoregon.edu>; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:40:34 -0800
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com ([171.71.177.238]) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 Jan 2006 02:40:29 -0800
X-IronPort-AV: i="3.99,359,1131350400"; d="scan'208"; a="390859828:sNHT34878156"
Received: from imail.cisco.com (sjc12-sbr-sw3-3f5.cisco.com [172.19.96.182]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id k0CAeSjt021719; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:40:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [144.254.23.75] (dhcp-data-vlan10-23-75.cisco.com [144.254.23.75]) by imail.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k0CAjdWV022041; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:45:41 -0800
Message-ID: <43C63217.8060908@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:40:23 +0100
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Macintosh/20051201)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
CC: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, David Kessens <david.kessens@nokia.com>, Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>, Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>, New Track <newtrk@lists.uoregon.edu>
Subject: Re: [newtrk] Re: IESG comments on draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-02.txt
References: <43A6C189.5030808@zurich.ibm.com> <43A7FD75.407@zurich.ibm.com> <8635B5E6C3C54CD0077C4054@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> <43C371D6.7070001@cisco.com> <3A4840D0F00A6A76B5D64133@svartdal.hjemme.alvestrand.no> <43C398F7.2030103@cisco.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0601101345490.1419@netcore.fi> <43C3A08C.3080204@cisco.com> <20060112010657.GL10186@nokia.com> <43C5ADA3.2040508@isi.edu> <20060112072407.GA13064@nokia.com> <531E34E5729171DB692C2A84@svartdal.hjemme.alvestrand.no> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0601121154130.28602@netcore.fi>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0601121154130.28602@netcore.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=469; t=1137062743; x=1137494943; c=nowsp; s=nebraska; h=Subject:From:Date:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; d=cisco.com; i=lear@cisco.com; z=Subject:Re=3A=20[newtrk]=20Re=3A=20IESG=20comments=20on=20draft-ietf-newtrk-decr uft-experiment-02.txt| From:Eliot=20Lear=20<lear@cisco.com>| Date:Thu,=2012=20Jan=202006=2011=3A40=3A23=20+0100| Content-Type:text/plain=3B=20charset=3DISO-8859-1| Content-Transfer-Encoding:7bit; b=DHP2T/epFZRH9syYfDlyIbmVPpmQEYyHLVw70SPN64iQ3SP8R5GWy/JMoxdvGO8MeRQl+DHB GUmEpzSkABn6uQo5RHmlQEahus1C03+PlyiluncWTJ5mh+L2/tNHNmvLMXVL8FAb8r4ZdUO0COm YbD/M7hgeZ1A70hUG5mdKOfM=
Authentication-Results: imail.cisco.com; header.From=lear@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( message from cisco.com verified; );
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88/1238/Wed Jan 11 02:19:06 2006 on mailapps
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Sender: owner-newtrk@lists.uoregon.edu
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Pekka Savola wrote:
> What could, on the other hand, imply more work for the IESG is pushing
> documents up in the standards track -- but this experiment hasn't
> really been about that (IMHO). (The more work would be caused by
> additional IETF last calls, judging the consensus, evaluating the
> implementation reports, having to read standards track revisions more
> carefully, etc.)
And I view this as part of the charter of the IESG, and this is also why
a timeline was established in RFC 2026.  Again, if you want to rewrite
2026 go ahead, but stop ignoring it.

Eliot
.
newtrk resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email