IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rsab] draft-rswg-rfc7990-updates-08

"Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Tue, 16 April 2024 20:48 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: rsab@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rsab@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F5B9C14F749 for <rsab@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:48:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kuehlewind.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dz9ccjPBC1Hz for <rsab@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:48:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [80.237.130.35]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29505C14F73F for <rsab@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:48:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kuehlewind.net; s=he234030; h=To:References:Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version: Content-Type:From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description: In-Reply-To:References; bh=UCLwQt/YnoyIuscrwMczxElxuQMrhfqR/3Z2REmMflE=; t=1713300494; x=1713732494; b=RPNdAJcCmC/dRO97PymJz0zCk9EWBoh/SLrfPGxPDOtAMPT iRhPxOAtRuPRUT6hOSfXtw1IlWQVlu1CsHDi1gz5/8ZHvtbydLxguzEk6FGjv1piA+ueHEHrgMaiw Z75yYITjU9HdmO/zcq6UYvdVztecrrbtnHsNH+oeLIzN8hrx1piBJqSpCiG+UZPYg2jNQPpLMXida kmiBhRG/HGQzmPYrC9ShZwiX0Xty5lVYYpVDHRRopDCc+u6c6XUopCBMBbS94Us+WVayDlFTgLfxH x5DqQhQJmuKFq4I3MTlqaZX8w6WG3v+wuSewoI862RarHNIw2AIstKTFWWGYDVHg==;
Received: from dslb-002-207-003-144.002.207.pools.vodafone-ip.de ([2.207.3.144] helo=smtpclient.apple); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1rwpiu-0002xd-1R; Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:48:12 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.500.171.1.1\))
From: "Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <42eaf6eb-511e-4580-ba8b-a902623a7176@lear.ch>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:47:46 +0200
Cc: rsab@rfc-editor.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1C915051-739D-494D-B9F0-EBF0F5821DC2@kuehlewind.net>
References: <66258AE8-FEF3-4094-B21C-6CE53D0056E2@icann.org> <A3F4A2F3-8578-4BAA-871E-55B36C16C042@episteme.net> <3812BBD4-F934-449F-B861-C06D9466D8F1@vigilsec.com> <42eaf6eb-511e-4580-ba8b-a902623a7176@lear.ch>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.500.171.1.1)
X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1713300494;373f2678;
X-HE-SMSGID: 1rwpiu-0002xd-1R
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rsab/e9GCiLaKHtf7ydL4ZME7ZFYp_9U>
Subject: Re: [rsab] draft-rswg-rfc7990-updates-08
X-BeenThere: rsab@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RFC Series Approval Board \(RSAB\)" <rsab.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rsab>, <mailto:rsab-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rsab/>
List-Post: <mailto:rsab@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rsab-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rsab>, <mailto:rsab-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 20:48:18 -0000

Hi Eloit,

I’m not sure I understand your comments below. This process with the shepherd is what we discussed on the RSAB list a couple of weeks ago for our internal process. I will send a further note with some discussed refinements in the next days (as I just came back from holidays) but other than that it’s what I thought be basically already agreed on. Or do you have further concerns about the proposed internal process?

Mirja



> On 16. Apr 2024, at 20:36, Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> wrote:
> 
> Hi Russ,
> 
> Thanks.  I believe we are at Step 6 of Section 3.2.2 of RFC 9280.  It's fine to have a shepherd for organizational purposes, to see that the process moves forward, but the I don't think it's necessary or appropriate to do steps 2 or 6 below.  At step 4 below, the shepherd needs to share all comments with the RSAB members so that we individually can gauge community response.  We then proceed to steps 7, 8, and 9 in 3.2.2 of RFC 9280, the last of which is step 5 below.  If there are no CONCERNs, we're finished, as per Step 11 in 3.2.2 of 9280.  How about we worry about steps 12 and beyond if that situation arises.
> 
> Eliot
> 
> On 16.04.2024 20:26, Russ Housley wrote:
> 
>> The RSWG has reached consensus on draft-rswg-rfc7990-updates-08.  This is the first document that the RSWG will be sending to the RSAB, so Pete and I would like to understand the process.
>> 
>> We believe that the process starts with an email to this mail list.  This is step zero.
>> 
>> Then ...
>> 
>> 1. The secretariat assigns a shepherd.
>> 
>> 2. The shepherd makes an initial review.
>> 
>> 3. The secretariat sends a call for community review for two weeks (or longer if requested by the shepherd).
>> 
>> 4.  The shepherd will review comments, working with the RSWG and authors to address them.
>> 
>> 5. RSAB evaluation, with comments or CONCERN being sent to the RWSG list.  Again, the shepherd will review comments or CONCERN, working with the RSWG and authors to address them.
>> 
>> 6. Shepherd final review to determine whether approval has been achieved.
>> 
>> 7. If approved, the secretariat inform the RPC, RSWG, and possibly others.
>> 
>> Please let us know if this summary matches your plan for the first document.
>> 
>> Russ
>> 
> <OpenPGP_0x87B66B46D9D27A33.asc>-- 
> RSAB mailing list
> RSAB@rfc-editor.org
> https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rsab

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email