RE: [Fwd: Re: [Policy] Approved: draft-ietf-policy-core-schema-16 .txt]

"Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com> Tue, 22 April 2003 14:34 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA11824 for <policy-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 10:34:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3MEkZx10588 for policy-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 10:46:35 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3MEgZ810387; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 10:42:37 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3MEcf809989 for <policy@optimus.ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 10:38:41 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA11507 for <policy@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 10:26:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 197ylV-00026c-00 for policy@ietf.org; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 10:28:57 -0400
Received: from auemail2.lucent.com ([192.11.223.163] helo=auemail2.firewall.lucent.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 197ylU-00026Z-00 for policy@ietf.org; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 10:28:56 -0400
Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com [135.85.76.62]) by auemail2.firewall.lucent.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h3MESmC20309 for <policy@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 10:28:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <2R19XAHF>; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 16:28:48 +0200
Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B155016A3608@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com>
From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
To: ned.freed@mrochek.com, "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
Cc: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>, policy@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Fwd: Re: [Policy] Approved: draft-ietf-policy-core-schema-16 .txt]
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 16:28:37 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: policy-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: policy-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: policy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy>, <mailto:policy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Policy Framework <policy.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:policy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:policy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy>, <mailto:policy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>

Thanks fro your elaboration Ned. Now that you repeat it, I do indeed
recall that you expect to raise a discuss. 

The draft-zeilenga-ldap-user-schema is referenced in a normative manner
from the policy schema document, that is why it came up on the policy
WG list, and that is why I hope we can find a solution soon.
(Policy doc has been in RFC-Editor queue fro many months already).

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ned.freed@mrochek.com [mailto:ned.freed@mrochek.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 22 april 2003 15:56
> To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
> Cc: Kurt D. Zeilenga; policy@ietf.org; Ned Freed (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: [Fwd: Re: [Policy] Approved:
> draft-ietf-policy-core-schema-16 .txt]
> 
> 
> > As I stated a week (or two) ago, I am working this in the IESG.
> 
> > Kurt, your document has NOT yet been approved. WE're working on it.
> > If you go to the ballow page (which you can do from the 
> view details)
> > then you will see that there is one D (Defer), namely Ned Freed.
> > He asked for extra time to review... and he will do so before
> > May 1st. At that time (I hope) the doc can pass, unless NED finds
> > something serious.
> 
> There seems to be some confusion here.
> 
> First, the document I have a defer on is 
> draft-zeilenga-ldap-user-schema,
> not draft-ietf-policy-core-schema. The latter is in the RFC Editor
> queue.
> 
> Second, I thought I made it clear on the call that there was 
> little chance my
> defer would turn into anything other than a discuss.
> 
> The problem I have with this document is that it reuses a 
> number of attributes
> from a variety of other specifications that are themselves 
> not well specified.
> And these specification issues are causing operational 
> problems. I don't think
> it is appropriate to let the specification proceed without 
> addressing these
> issues. I'm trying to find and fix as many of these as I can 
> and I'm trying to
> tap additional experienced people within Sun to review this as well.
> 
> 				Ned
> 
_______________________________________________
Policy mailing list
Policy@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/policy