IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Rswg] Re: RFC 9280: success or failure? And how would we know?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Fri, 22 November 2024 08:48 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: rswg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rswg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 822B6C1D6FC5 for <rswg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:48:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.907
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 wtaxgBmBHXDF for <rswg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:48:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D843C1D6FBD for <rswg@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:48:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [134.102.212.177] (unknown [134.102.212.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Xvpfb08M3zDCbP; Fri, 22 Nov 2024 09:48:38 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <7f5c1823-57c3-4713-8a52-34b06ca638cf@lear.ch>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 09:48:38 +0100
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 753958118.457327-b7a5e3aa45c45cd23f800cb2376c8159
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E876EF57-9814-482B-BE85-FD47B97F76B7@tzi.org>
References: <d8c57185-147e-44a2-b244-de4f7952974f@lear.ch> <354A833D-3FD6-45E5-BCC8-FADC74296308@tzi.org> <6f5520da-79f7-4aa4-9e4b-284b76966e2c@gmail.com> <426c6f8e-d831-46c2-b9bc-281f08433ad8@nostrum.com> <07AAFB49-C4E2-4948-8E3A-8CAD3172AF03@episteme.net> <f815bd91-fd89-4c8f-9948-2cb74790cc61@nostrum.com> <8fba4d70-93c9-4e15-b984-b38bc9d14c4a@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <7f5c1823-57c3-4713-8a52-34b06ca638cf@lear.ch>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Message-ID-Hash: K3GNWKVUZKAFRZGDSTCEK736ESG2ROWU
X-Message-ID-Hash: K3GNWKVUZKAFRZGDSTCEK736ESG2ROWU
X-MailFrom: cabo@tzi.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: "\"Martin J. Dürst\"" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>, Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net>, RSWG <rswg@rfc-editor.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [Rswg] Re: RFC 9280: success or failure? And how would we know?
List-Id: "RFC Series Working Group (RSWG)" <rswg.rfc-editor.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rswg/KrSQvzPw_tv_h3gannmdy3FzWSQ>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rswg>
List-Help: <mailto:rswg-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:rswg-owner@rfc-editor.org>
List-Post: <mailto:rswg@rfc-editor.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:rswg-join@rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rswg-leave@rfc-editor.org>

> I think Martin put his finger on it.  But let's test it out: Robert, what would be the thing you want to do next?

If prioritizing means waiting for consensus on how things should get prioritized, I’d rather that we do all things at once.

Grüße, Carsten

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status