IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Dealing with Design issues following Last Call

Dmitri Tikhonov <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.com> Fri, 18 December 2020 21:55 UTC

Return-Path: <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 186013A0AB5 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:55:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=litespeedtech-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 7nLnbfTHcV2a for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:55:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk1-x730.google.com (mail-qk1-x730.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::730]) (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 B41983A09C1 for <quic@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:55:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk1-x730.google.com with SMTP id h4so3561742qkk.4 for <quic@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:55:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=litespeedtech-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=MZvkChN4x1t/Dpgn2d3VHRqLqoHNtDqUXyr9gHjuLXI=; b=r5RTKr2y9bbE33eFGHfDVvjJ8o3/UVDN4NnUGTpeAFY+fzIi7XJh3osdMZQ/n2WStn JRe+b8CHqdDxWxSrMdLjAFLNTt2Q5f3YGrj9M3CjDhjMZXINgD3zdrCnBWCnCp6Ib+Fl toMkPhelJVUbKe8PTW1Ssu+AD5sm5mivf0OT5mkAaW7LpKzMeHTNF1yjutPWv0gB1qsC QCJsveFDI1/Vk+Kn7+BKcPxdKwrFveBTTu0fSZDWwd6BTM4k62Ghk6bNhYYGEu+C+6s0 E3jpbqzPhboW5jAqLM058QXlyYCvzs/9Cl1C0BfShoV45EdaygFmXFec5j3ICXxx0teL Ucpg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=MZvkChN4x1t/Dpgn2d3VHRqLqoHNtDqUXyr9gHjuLXI=; b=X01LNQXuprFL0+nNMStFAj2LhXcStY0MFtjn6i52QT7XrNNU7qeXs77JIkk1UNe9ZO 7e0dWenVm4jl6OI14xg32ovAxshHfdtl70JLRt253aO91zhs2VIZ0e6h2LkZdiduVG1J dCjd13FGV0v5RA+lVTTRuEBKh+2WH+NpxghJk2CCXLN3xgCu+YVQt5zK3eWfFhlaOdSZ sATLILPzpFUTSTmdUmy7W0l3W9wplAIIN/cuBi7wdmFSsjD7MrOoXViota9XfSn4jdfq N8X2YfNkvPpuiwGhDp0MHhXycPGbfCtoyQ6djqSv+Y0G6Wo2adKH6MNPCy+XsIDgFsSZ ceAQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531734yYLqlPWTBfDZeo6QdcLXwr+xkgm8afCnJWIYMYeoSsmiIH BDyYTIeDwjPI3AlZvvvdApsG9tf8omu3Vw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwEv8rH5Dz6wEwGOpqYU7WFlFpEPDSOsKykO3D2oHTTdC4flf++HjDK2JT4r6MmBPdQlHgIfA==
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a510:: with SMTP id o16mr3711783qke.383.1608328540148; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:55:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from okhta (ool-44c1d219.dyn.optonline.net. [68.193.210.25]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l204sm6655305qke.56.2020.12.18.13.55.39 for <quic@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:55:39 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 16:55:37 -0500
From: Dmitri Tikhonov <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.com>
To: quic@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Dealing with Design issues following Last Call
Message-ID: <20201218215537.GD34756@okhta>
Mail-Followup-To: quic@ietf.org
References: <CALGR9oaAfy0jj=mqX1tiuKdE=Kk=mRHgv15pUUM1XHBMovkw4Q@mail.gmail.com> <20201218201131.GB34756@okhta> <CALGR9oZ13gFRjZERT9z6tEXZY+mxwncpiyPzwCuqK+BJemE98w@mail.gmail.com> <20201218205736.GC34756@okhta> <0f4fa906-2531-9e97-01eb-b3eb40922bbb@huitema.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0f4fa906-2531-9e97-01eb-b3eb40922bbb@huitema.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/-9rahgk96RVB4MnVZ3NVL3zPJqY>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 21:55:47 -0000

Thank you, Christian, you've calmed my fears!

  - Dmitri.

On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 01:36:46PM -0800, Christian Huitema wrote:
> On 12/18/2020 12:57 PM, Dmitri Tikhonov wrote:
> 
> > I am trying to prevent a situation where IESG approves -33 on one day and
> > the RFC is published two days later and we do not have the changes
> > implemented yet.  Then, we would really have to scramble!  Am I naive to
> > expect such speedy RFC turnaround?
> 
> Typical delay between IESG approval and final publication is 3-4 months.
> Very rarely fewer than 2 months. Could be more if caught behind a big queue,
> or if authors and copy editors get in a long discussion.
> 
> -- Christian Huitema
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email