Re: [rmcat] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests-09: (with COMMENT)

Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Thu, 05 March 2020 09:38 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76CE83A1120; Thu, 5 Mar 2020 01:38:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 47QGDlv3tVod; Thu, 5 Mar 2020 01:38:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (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 9E7CF3A111D; Thu, 5 Mar 2020 01:38:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p200300dee7239a00e984148d77e3bc6d.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:de:e723:9a00:e984:148d:77e3:bc6d]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1j9mxx-0007IM-Lt; Thu, 05 Mar 2020 10:38:53 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <158338504130.29359.13757786280111258112@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2020 10:38:53 +0100
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, rmcat-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests@ietf.org, csp@csperkins.org, rmcat@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <44A9C969-A019-4A11-A544-CFA87CC50BE1@kuehlewind.net>
References: <158338504130.29359.13757786280111258112@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1583401135;5c6b4625;
X-HE-SMSGID: 1j9mxx-0007IM-Lt
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rmcat/OORrubv6ao7BQpSGGZK9LmLnqFE>
Subject: Re: [rmcat] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests-09: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: rmcat@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTP Media Congestion Avoidance Techniques \(RMCAT\) Working Group discussion list." <rmcat.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rmcat>, <mailto:rmcat-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rmcat/>
List-Post: <mailto:rmcat@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rmcat-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rmcat>, <mailto:rmcat-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2020 09:38:58 -0000

Hi Adam,

Thanks for noticing, somehow I didn’t even noticed that there are more than 5 authors… This document was merged out of two documents (as now also indicated in the “replaces” section). I will check if that is still the right thing to do and update the shepherd write-up accordingly if needed.

Maybe we should add a separate point on this in the write-up?

Mirja

P.S.: We will also remove the unnecessary reference. This is a left-over from before the merge and we fixed some of them but overlooked this one.



> On 5. Mar 2020, at 06:10, Adam Roach via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests-09: No Objection
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Thanks for the work that went into creating this document.
> 
> ID Nits correctly reports:
> 
>  == Unused Reference: 'I-D.ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements' is defined on line
>     998, but no explicit reference was found in the text
> 
> As a note for the AD: I can’t find a justification in the ballot or shepherd’s
> writeup for why this document has six authors instead of a smaller number of
> editors and a list of contributors. It would be nice to capture the exception
> rationale in one of those two places for posterity.
> 
> 
> 
>