IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rfced-future] Issue 145 Re: WGLC Review of the draft

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Wed, 05 January 2022 17:46 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 514623A05A6 for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:46:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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=rtfm-com.20210112.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 5us8mMF-oJZ0 for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:46:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-il1-x12d.google.com (mail-il1-x12d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12d]) (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 A9A4E3A0544 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:46:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-il1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id j6so134321ila.4 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 09:46:34 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=j5/He5Td3Y7S/M9cwrPJyZ2nYMh+yazuPqvZgw37qfE=; b=58G+CxtuE2VH8lx+e3CUwAhvAkUZ7J67qLUdg95c3PL+0bCm5E//pDcgvxoM1vBaP9 FSwlngw2GryorAqZilgYvA4vF8hFwloSxx/KS6uEYxXzTVjFLDK4EApddj96wwYWTcvg 20K+rf99eOPntoQ6NHQmkZfVMA1IF2eTZawNB2RH4nv1hpOYbtaGMntHg+LZtoaaR5qr v0DzXmN51nxe4fh31sC5gvh6NlGL5cJAydDwe1p/jIWVBKQu4tmYD6G8RTgQtP5MvL2P RX7RpCWuvpfcHERv4m7MyxFbf6AlFljjhLv31yN5fK5sjODDi068MKNHoEDuc8WVCDez +IAw==
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=j5/He5Td3Y7S/M9cwrPJyZ2nYMh+yazuPqvZgw37qfE=; b=FVsxJbPX9uNPKfYQ4GAuuXg9SYBkrsFHzhj5JhEW+Rlj9ASj9H1zXw/dxNwzB6zy3b 5z7Z1uljhTlQ5SDBVtzGkC/Qjo1znqAhe2HpxXYrF4nZVaajudaeH40nN5cQehlW2wGI zxkQ69rc5nKtiF6LGCQQ/o74NNK9wW16HptVWmga4QIfHDNte0FhKDOOPBKwTDh6toiR vFbu8hDTOi2hNvdRs6kQHAYaqLROcVwkdmBprd+YmRoiDKsKgDSXiARomASRuMtKNJnr AjKitgh2o+evRs618hQJgGRYHMojD1j0He4jJ3Cu8mbPykkkN73OoOu+gRJSjmyhxhls LQDw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533KLsHax4TZ7m/IlT3K/SYNZ46WjVjsp6xXvL45ERLUzwwC4/vv R96X9YHpZN7rMpKBEe+2Aoton1JepiUuY8tSV+90A6DBBGo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwgpfZU3oR4GFd7dHyEepSWe4wNmMH8OzFfM8Z7Zv1n1G6Hm9JqR4L48rGpXYnWUavy7uQnDlKYK7yn86lR15o=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:670e:: with SMTP id b14mr25574834ilc.39.1641404793640; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 09:46:33 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABcZeBO3-q+SMTFNZyeC50eghFs1CJNSLojmr1Zip1g_nsGZHQ@mail.gmail.com> <d7ce7879-2324-69d1-0770-e104aff6c68c@stpeter.im> <CABcZeBMtZUa9cdr6a7znjdMY3UwNPpg2d0d4KwosfmzE1KqmxQ@mail.gmail.com> <3983646a-f1bc-d094-0319-a32dd61e1bda@lear.ch>
In-Reply-To: <3983646a-f1bc-d094-0319-a32dd61e1bda@lear.ch>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2022 09:45:57 -0800
Message-ID: <CABcZeBPBoTdGi73e27Odt9ZdhBW3rUF4px_5Myzn8oL2KyGZYA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
Cc: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>, rfced-future@iab.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a86f1a05d4d95549"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/HMhbsFbSJeReH15eNi8oTT_IPUg>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] Issue 145 Re: WGLC Review of the draft
X-BeenThere: rfced-future@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Editor Future Development Program <rfced-future.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfced-future/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfced-future@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2022 17:46:39 -0000

On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 12:58 AM Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> wrote:

> Hi EKR
> On 04.01.22 01:43, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> One way to look at it is that the community call for comment could
>> surface issues that meet the first two criteria, and if so it's the
>> responsibility of the RSAB to bring those back to the review process by
>> raising CONCERN positions. This way, arbitrary community concerns that
>> don't meet the first two criteria can't get special consideration.
>>
>
> Yes, that would work for me.
>
> So long as it is clear that feedback received as part of a "broader
> review" may shift consensus,
>

Absolutely that should be clear.

-Ekr


> Step 6 is the relevant clause. It may be helpful to highlight that in
> Section 3.2.3.
>
> Eliot
> --
> Rfced-future mailing list
> Rfced-future@iab.org
> https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email