From nobody Wed Sep 22 22:30:09 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: perc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: perc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F4A33A20AB; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 22:29:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 4UH2DXNypwey; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 22:29:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vs1-xe2f.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 998843A20A9; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 22:29:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vs1-xe2f.google.com with SMTP id y141so5358015vsy.5; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 22:29:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=pTh6c+prQoRxuEMoxO1L9/jaodO9tMAv8qt+zFDQn/U=; b=EzSNxxN/SzNhXD108pVXOnRH1F89Y3icL8G5Ur82UW2g5PPcZTw2FNGh6rfT85JjwR XYfPaiUzPHBetm6xTyegKnguuigbLFech/eqOZ46acbBagblD2m7vbWiJxd4OBL7wGF3 xJeT631fUBVUhTIlMQrQPdmtcrkFRhm0bSph0tzys08yGqg7SPNJRd1Gbvyys+YLvkO/ d/Pg4se+zRqPoNIEexuT1vrd62Ni+tvyQpGImyPnEey0QGvFfHwnUqOD932Pel+fl5Qy EX9XXJzVFi0Js+PSxlGCZeVtVmW232jMTsy45enWmJkYgcvySykdJkuyP1Zyf6qCGgwO 3qhg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pTh6c+prQoRxuEMoxO1L9/jaodO9tMAv8qt+zFDQn/U=; b=6xnkbVhhYk8JuqavekSgW18qidsAqq4jpASFKZQ13gbLo9PPplxDphCk8/X8OjJy94 jbStVrt6eM8dNdxxauojJlZl37IIJ3lEGrdKLTJd4oROKXKunjpOi/P147DqGssKPmXR FlMdoOZmA1taEdoFDk904a/xHiIb54CmwrcssCq2VjJ2qNj08KasdtR/vDmpveVpqe4i PcvDD8h7rVRrapgyCmXt/HWeUaqr62tRRSgoZvnHszD3+xdHG9osbXCDYSVSYckPxnFQ IlQC/QYcS7C5tHD2Rtj4vsKAKS+7OH0Yn77hrfO939cawY2HpjqFciLe2QDtmYITdZfJ geVg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5339/BY79AiNSBsxM6WmQXBVunnTGibqr1FhI/forhJlz9+4z1TF dhrFOl3PNKA3OXmsnoM4XBaCiaxLxXFhUkMvmaY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyEbgfid9W69ZgsGOmDHEEj9S09cvjcnPoucujMc3IQxTt5bv0xCM/4UOdGjwZ0Y9qDJsnGHTByjkSrrrtHvjw= X-Received: by 2002:a67:c989:: with SMTP id y9mr2852506vsk.12.1632374984501; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 22:29:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <162510321507.13724.12968550804927630403@ietfa.amsl.com> <235FA332-7A68-4189-B74E-52D7276AE8AD@iii.ca> In-Reply-To: <235FA332-7A68-4189-B74E-52D7276AE8AD@iii.ca> From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 22:29:33 -0700 Message-ID: To: Cullen Jennings Cc: Benjamin Kaduk , Paul Jones , Suhas Nandakumar , perc@ietf.org, perc-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-perc-dtls-tunnel@ietf.org, The IESG Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000176c0505cca2eb5b" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Perc] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-perc-dtls-tunnel-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) X-BeenThere: perc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Privacy Enhanced RTP Conferencing List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 05:29:52 -0000 --000000000000176c0505cca2eb5b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 1:57 PM Cullen Jennings wrote: > On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 6:17 PM Paul E. Jones 40packetizer.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > >> (2) I'll also mention here so that the IESG can talk about it during our >> telechat (but with no intent to insist on a change): this document >> specifies a versioned protocol and creates a registry. Are we happy >> with the current Informational status, as opposed to Proposed Standard? >> I do see that the topic was touched on in the shepherd writeup, but the >> treatment there did not feel especially compelling to me. >> >> >> Hopefully that got resolved. I'll await instructions on any requested >> changes here. >> > > I'm not aware of a resolution. I never got a reply after my message of > July 1, where I suggested some possible paths by the working group. > > -MSK > > > I=E2=80=99m having a hard time understanding the problem here. As far as = I know > there is no requirement for a document to be standards track to create an > IANA registry - am I missing something? I was under the belief that a > document does not even need to be part of the IETF stream for inclusion > into IANA. > > I would rather see this document published than go back to WGLC. > I'll follow up with Ben and the others during the next IESG telechat (in about nine hours). In any event, it looks like Paul needs to post a new version before this can go forward. -MSK --000000000000176c0505cca2eb5b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 1:57 PM Cullen Jen= nings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote:
=
On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 6:= 17 PM Paul E. Jones <paulej=3D40packetizer.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

(2) I'll also m= ention here so that the IESG can talk about it during our
telechat (but with no intent to insist on a change): this document
specifies a versioned protocol and creates a registry. Are we happy
with the current Informational status, as opposed to Proposed Standard= ?
I do see that the topic was touched on in the shepherd writeup, but th= e
treatment there did not feel especially compelling to me.

Hopefully that got r= esolved.=C2=A0 I'll await instructions on any requested changes here.

I'm not aware o= f a resolution.=C2=A0 I never got a reply after my message of July 1, where= I suggested some possible paths by the working group.

=
-MSK


I=E2=80=99= m having a hard time understanding the problem here. As far as I know there= is no requirement for a document to be standards track to create an IANA r= egistry - am I missing something? I was under the belief that a document do= es not even need to be part of the IETF stream for inclusion into IANA. =C2= =A0

I would rather see this document published tha= n go back to WGLC.

I'l= l follow up with Ben and the others during the next IESG telechat (in about= nine hours).

In any event, it looks like Paul needs to post a new = version before this can go forward.

-MSK
=
--000000000000176c0505cca2eb5b--