From nobody Wed Sep 23 09:07:06 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCB3F3A1217; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 09:06:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.119 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.119 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, 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=cooperw.in header.b=FKlkFDje; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=GpfsdUIy 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 DXb6aufxHaf8; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 09:06:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1207F3A1201; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 09:06:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ED415C0134; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 12:06:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 23 Sep 2020 12:06:52 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= from:message-id:content-type:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; s=fm1; bh=zY8y5TgZxkNrey9QPCvLqnJ QPfyCI9irOqjE03v5PlY=; b=FKlkFDjekZCQeapikWLupZeqMLdI3iUtbnOWIMP YP43pcgBBDpYantqYzGsoSkK68FnB9ZSXBr/MwAKPnndSNVxYAcYTFVtA2BzYGg6 1z7PQpLLq+25ncReNgH/DqENps3QpLzu9al4O+79NQkzZU4E2mj13iW05WMSMduu ffEHQ1gQYayWqrkghq1ROFAXVFJHU7U3uBheZRjnR2yy3vCCNmzsAq6OKwDtIbMo +o8v+mZAv052cdoKSg13kxOUAJNjLLTxJFxQ2FBvNtJEdmebOMmxiVPocmHAyRi4 4Q7GJ8EgnCknxbeLX3wpEhnUMAoD+oB4W5+eR0fZNNFo6Pg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=zY8y5T gZxkNrey9QPCvLqnJQPfyCI9irOqjE03v5PlY=; b=GpfsdUIy0cS0OpTF8Nbyni cVudzTpxJama2m2za6JW8KjgwvaIT5PG2FYiI/kI/Nb0mLa+lztZQ9udTq276aqY A0on5KIQYFVtBJhZEPioA1F2zJX7b8zb9EwTHDZJZMu0yd8FBgfYRC4vFpppyaVU ltYqn8Iz9Iz2TJ9nWepvResFOsx0bG29dz6sJFioecj/Atv8VErf2ZDHDDT6Es6u zbh/UlxIAjjgUDtPmq2vPRKCHPmXY41q3xyLHVVE0UUY4tN7M5NkDBZVDqa2YsIH Cdh4wgWR03Od1bnu7Tak+BSV5WwCPlTCrtqnVm5OVQy1wWyO9375eHExs5gbqwFw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrudeigdelkecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhkfgtggfuffgjvfhfofesrgdtmherhhdtjeenucfhrhhomheptehlihhsshgr ucevohhophgvrhcuoegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhnqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeeggefffeduvdfffeelgfehkedtiefghefftdetteeifeefhfefudegudeuvdev hfenucffohhmrghinhepihgvthhfrdhorhhgnecukfhppedutdekrdehuddruddtuddrle eknecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheprghl ihhsshgrsegtohhophgvrhifrdhinh X-ME-Proxy: Received: from alcoop-m-c46z.fios-router.home (pool-108-51-101-98.washdc.fios.verizon.net [108.51.101.98]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 526243280065; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 12:06:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Alissa Cooper Message-Id: <74859504-CAB0-4DC3-BE87-9E8185E94F0F@cooperw.in> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_041F4C61-346C-4654-9ADB-D89826E4596D" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 12:06:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: Cc: Barry Leiba , last-call@ietf.org, Mario Loffredo , "gen-art >> General area reviewing team" , regext@ietf.org, draft-ietf-regext-rdap-sorting-and-paging.all@ietf.org To: Vijay Gurbani References: <159753241794.3282.10287963728007886569@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [regext] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-regext-rdap-sorting-and-paging-15 X-BeenThere: regext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 16:06:58 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_041F4C61-346C-4654-9ADB-D89826E4596D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Vijay, thanks for your review. Mario, Barry, thanks for your responses = aand the new appendix. I entered a No Objection ballot. Alissa > On Aug 18, 2020, at 9:52 AM, Vijay Gurbani = wrote: >=20 > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 2:57 PM Barry Leiba > wrote: > Hi, Mario and Vijay. >=20 > 7942 says that the Implementation Status section is inappropriate to = include in an RFC because it=E2=80=99s transient information that = changes, and is usually obsolete quickly. >=20 > But I don=E2=80=99t interpret Vijay=E2=80=99s suggestion as asking you = to leave the section in the document in it=E2=80=99s entirety, but, = rather, to put non-ephemeral information about a reference = implementation into an appendix. If there=E2=80=99s a stable = implementation that can be used in that way, I think it would be = appropriate, and I agree with Vijay that it could be helpful to other = implementors to have that information available. >=20 > Dear Barry and Mario: Thanks for paying attention to my review, and = Barry is indeed correct. =20 >=20 > Especially that the two implementations listed in the implementation = section appear to be almost fully conformant to the draft, and also = appear to have reasonable documentation, etc. around them. It would = seem to be a waste of code to simply take this section out without = preserving the good work done here that can get other implementers = started immediately. >=20 > Cheers, >=20 > - vijay > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art --Apple-Mail=_041F4C61-346C-4654-9ADB-D89826E4596D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Vijay, thanks for your review. Mario, Barry, thanks for your = responses aand the new appendix. I entered a No Objection ballot.

Alissa


On Aug 18, 2020, at 9:52 AM, Vijay Gurbani = <vijay.gurbani@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 2:57 PM = Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
Hi, Mario and Vijay.

7942 says = that the Implementation Status section is inappropriate to include in an = RFC because it=E2=80=99s transient information that changes, and is = usually obsolete quickly.

But I don=E2=80=99t = interpret Vijay=E2=80=99s suggestion as asking you to leave the section = in the document in it=E2=80=99s entirety, but, rather, to put = non-ephemeral information about a reference implementation into an = appendix.  If there=E2=80=99s a stable implementation that can be = used in that way, I think it would be appropriate, and I agree with = Vijay that it could be helpful to other implementors to have that = information available.

Dear Barry and Mario: Thanks for paying = attention to my review, and Barry is indeed correct. 

Especially that the two implementations listed in the = implementation section appear to be almost fully conformant to the = draft, and also appear to have reasonable documentation, etc. around = them.  It would seem to be a waste of code to simply take this = section out without preserving the good work done here that can get = other implementers started immediately.

Cheers,

- vijay
_______________________________________________
Gen-art = mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

= --Apple-Mail=_041F4C61-346C-4654-9ADB-D89826E4596D--