Re: [RADIR] finishing the problem statement
Jason Schiller <schiller@uu.net> Mon, 09 March 2009 21:06 UTC
Return-Path: <schiller@uu.net>
X-Original-To: radir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: radir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F03953A6C86 for <radir@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 14:06:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mZDW3SU+6OlT for <radir@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 14:06:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ashesmtp01.verizonbusiness.com (ashesmtp01.verizonbusiness.com [198.4.8.163]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73DC13A68A9 for <radir@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 14:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omzismtp01.vzbi.com ([165.122.46.164]) by firewall.verizonbusiness.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-5.02 (built Oct 12 2007; 32bit)) with ESMTP id <0KG9001BMBS20W00@firewall.verizonbusiness.com> for radir@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:02:27 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from omzismtp01.vzbi.com ([127.0.0.1]) by omzismtp01.vzbi.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-5.02 (built Oct 12 2007; 32bit)) with ESMTP id <0KG900FGHBS26D00@omzismtp01.vzbi.com> for radir@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:02:26 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from meno.corp.us.uu.net ([153.39.146.71]) by omzismtp01.vzbi.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-5.02 (built Oct 12 2007; 32bit)) with ESMTP id <0KG900F8MBS29D00@omzismtp01.vzbi.com> for radir@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:02:26 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:02:25 -0500
From: Jason Schiller <schiller@uu.net>
X-Sender: schiller@meno.corp.us.uu.net
To: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
In-reply-to: <200903091507.n29F7Ipg014272@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
Message-id: <Pine.GSO.4.20.0903091601340.3818-100000@meno.corp.us.uu.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Cc: radir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [RADIR] finishing the problem statement
X-BeenThere: radir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing and Addressing Directorate <radir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radir>, <mailto:radir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/radir>
List-Post: <mailto:radir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:radir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radir>, <mailto:radir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:06:37 -0000
I'm ok with the new boiler plate... looking over the new text now. __Jason ========================================================================== Jason Schiller (703)886.6648 Senior Internet Network Engineer fax:(703)886.0512 Public IP Global Network Engineering schiller@uu.net UUNET / Verizon jason.schiller@verizonbusiness.com The good news about having an email address that is twice as long is that it increases traffic on the Internet. On Mon, 9 Mar 2009, Thomas Narten wrote: > Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 11:07:18 -0400 > From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> > To: radir@ietf.org > Subject: [RADIR] finishing the problem statement > > We are a bit overdue on revising the problem statement and getting it > out... > > I spoke with Olaf a while back and he seemed to think that much of the > initial excitement about the topic had died down again, and anyway RRG > is where the work is actually happening. So he is inclined to see the > document shipped and close the directorate. However, the current > problem statement (as we have discussed amongst ourselves) does not > have any sort of broad concensus, so it couldn't get any sort of > official blessing. If we were to ask for publication now, we'd > likely be told to publish it as individual submission. > > As we've discussed before, Olaf has said the pressures on routing > section had good stuff, but that the business section in particular > was problematic. We've had past discussions about that together with > some suggestions for improvements. > > I would like to get this document published as an informational RFC, > but one with IETF blessing/support. That means we have to get folk > familiar with this space to support publication of our document. > > I spent some time going over the document in January, reviewed our > previous discussions and made a number of changes. I then didn't > followup and close the loop and get back to this list. > > One thing that of course happens when one re-reads a document after 6 > months is that one sees all sorts of things that should be tweaked. > > Rather than try to do an issue by issue review, I've just gone ahead > and revised the document; I'll send it (and diffs) in separate messages. > > The ID cutoff is today (7PM West Coast Time). I'd like to go ahead and > post the revised document, but if anyone thinks I should not (whether > on principle -- because you want to review more carefully first, or > because you have specific issues with the revision), please speak > up. I plan to post unless I get a "no". (I don't have plans to have > the document discussed in SF, so it is not critical that it get posted > today). > > Finally, I've used the following boilerplate: > > This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the > provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may contain material > from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly > available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the > copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF > Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the > IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from > the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this > document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and > derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards > Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to > translate it into languages other than English. > > I assume that we are all OK with submitting under the updated > boilerplate that grants full rights to the IETF trust, but the > document can't say that until I get explicite confirmation from each > of us on that point. > > Thomas > _______________________________________________ > RADIR mailing list > RADIR@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radir >
- [RADIR] finishing the problem statement Thomas Narten
- Re: [RADIR] finishing the problem statement Thomas Narten
- Re: [RADIR] finishing the problem statement Jason Schiller
- Re: [RADIR] finishing the problem statement Azinger, Marla