IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [pcp] Discussion about Closing PCP WG

Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com> Sun, 20 July 2014 17:51 UTC

Return-Path: <dthaler@microsoft.com>
X-Original-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E47BD1B291B for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 10:51:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.602
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 SR9R-Y21YKHj for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 10:51:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2lp0244.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.244]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C76A41B2919 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 10:51:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.25) by BY2PR03MB409.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.990.7; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 17:51:29 +0000
Received: from BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.25]) by BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.25]) with mapi id 15.00.0990.007; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 17:51:29 +0000
From: Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>
To: "Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [pcp] Discussion about Closing PCP WG
Thread-Index: Ac+kQRReCP/Gj5Y9hkitXO7sLwNpIwAAWFdQ
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 17:51:28 +0000
Message-ID: <86fd91ac72324d14963805df0e1e65fc@BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A282F5EA7@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A282F5EA7@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [31.133.163.94]
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:
x-forefront-prvs: 02788FF38E
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(6009001)(377454003)(189002)(51704005)(13464003)(199002)(24454002)(86362001)(74502001)(2656002)(80022001)(81542001)(92566001)(74316001)(85306003)(81342001)(83072002)(87936001)(83322001)(85852003)(106356001)(95666004)(31966008)(66066001)(79102001)(4396001)(77982001)(20776003)(21056001)(101416001)(99286002)(19580405001)(99396002)(15975445006)(74662001)(110136001)(54356999)(86612001)(76576001)(76176999)(64706001)(50986999)(46102001)(107046002)(105586002)(19580395003)(76482001)(33646002)(108616002)(24736002); DIR:OUT; SFP:; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB409; H:BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; MLV:sfv; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; LANG:en;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.onmicrosoft.com
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pcp/QsqB6DDhhMSywLCaXIIk_k-ORxY
Cc: "pcp@ietf.org" <pcp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [pcp] Discussion about Closing PCP WG
X-BeenThere: pcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: PCP wg discussion list <pcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pcp>, <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pcp/>
List-Post: <mailto:pcp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp>, <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 17:51:33 -0000

I would love to see the other WG documents make progress.

The DHCP document was just published (thanks to those who
Worked on that one!)

Two WG documents are making good progress and don't need
face to face discussion this week:
port-set is likely to be handed to the IESG this week
server-selection should start WGLC as soon as the update is posted.
Other than those two, we haven't seen any progress on other
WG docs since last IETF.

I completely agree that it would be good to finish auth, but we
need to see progress/energy/discussion around the doc or there's
not much we can do.

So we propose to hold an interim webex meeting in late August
after WGLC on server selection completes.

-Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pcp [mailto:pcp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tirumaleswar Reddy
> (tireddy)
> Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2014 1:36 PM
> To: Ted Lemon
> Cc: pcp@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [pcp] Discussion about Closing PCP WG
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ted Lemon [mailto:ted.lemon@nominum.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2014 5:24 PM
> > To: Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
> > Cc: Dan Wing (dwing); Margaret Wasserman; pcp@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [pcp] Discussion about Closing PCP WG
> >
> > On Jul 20, 2014, at 2:48 AM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
> > <tireddy@cisco.com>
> > wrote:
> > > In addition to PCP Authentication other pending WG documents should
> > > also be
> > taken to completion.  I see various interesting individual drafts like
> > draft- boucadair-pcp-sfc-classifier-control-00,
> > draft-chen-pcp-authentication-sim-00
> > etc. it seems too early to close the WG.
> >
> > The trick with taking work to completion is that the work has to be
> > worked on; I think what the chairs were getting at is that they feel there's
> no energy to do the
> > work.   If that's not the case, the way to show us that is to do the work, not
> to
> > say that the work needs to be done. :)
> 
> Agreed. I will review PCP Proxy and PCP Auth drafts early next month and post
> my comments.
> 
> -Tiru
> 
> >
> > That said, the two drafts you mentioned are not pcp working group
> documents.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pcp mailing list
> pcp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email