IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] Update on IESG discussion on draft-ietf-ntp-mode-6-cmds-09

Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org> Thu, 10 September 2020 20:54 UTC

Return-Path: <stenn@nwtime.org>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 904293A0FA9 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 13:54:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FROM_FMBLA_NEWDOM14=0.999, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 oI42iMTgBe48 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 13:54:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from chessie.everett.org (chessie.everett.org [66.220.13.234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB08C3A0FAF for <ntp@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 13:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.23.242.121] (mobile-166-137-177-240.mycingular.net [166.137.177.240]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BnWMY4HMQzL7h; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 20:54:01 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org>
In-Reply-To: <F6088A04-DFEC-4A62-9583-3EB19B16B66C@isoc.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 13:54:00 -0700
Cc: "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <A3A0119C-AAA9-42D8-887C-AE274AF40377@nwtime.org>
References: <F6088A04-DFEC-4A62-9583-3EB19B16B66C@isoc.org>
To: Karen O'Donoghue <odonoghue@isoc.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17G80)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/8fVBtACLwOGDesNnQbW92JggVcY>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Update on IESG discussion on draft-ietf-ntp-mode-6-cmds-09
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 20:54:05 -0000

Sorry to see this. 

Sent from my iPhone - please excuse brevity and typos

> On Sep 10, 2020, at 4:46 AM, Karen O'Donoghue <odonoghue@isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> NTP working group members, 
> 
> The IESG met on 27 August, and the following NTP wg document was on the agenda. 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ntp-mode-6-cmds/
> As was brought up during the IETF Last Call and the subsequent IESG balloting on the document, there was some discussion about the publication category for the document. The rough consensus of the IESG was that the document could be published as Historic with appropriate caveats. However, in order to be published as Informational, it was felt that the document needed to be updated to meet more modern IETF practices including security practices. After discussing this with Erik Kline (AD) and Brian Haberman (editor), we've decided to pursue as Historic as the fastest path to publication while still meeting the needs of the NTP community. 
> 
> Regards,
> Karen
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ntp mailing list
> ntp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email