IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [saag] Fwd: Last Call: Recognising RFC1984 as a BCP

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 11 August 2015 16:15 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C07111AC437 for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:15:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.611
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.611 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 Y0QXmjpU_B0T for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:15:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 173091AC430 for <saag@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:15:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1815C2079E; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:25:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id EDDEE63B10; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:08:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6A9F63AE8; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:08:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
In-Reply-To: <87d1yur5h9.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net>
References: <20150810171306.11047.24159.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <55C8EBAE.4070704@cs.tcd.ie> <370F0905-3815-4DA4-B21A-B321D92E12C9@isi.edu> <87d1yur5h9.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.3-dev; GNU Emacs 24.4.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:08:02 -0400
Message-ID: <10866.1439302082@sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/saag/GBL9fw5t6rZRg-wImHf2e3m4CYA>
Cc: "saag@ietf.org" <saag@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [saag] Fwd: Last Call: Recognising RFC1984 as a BCP
X-BeenThere: saag@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Advisory Group <saag.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/saag/>
List-Post: <mailto:saag@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 16:15:49 -0000

Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> wrote:
    >> I disagree with this change of status.

    > Is your disagreement on process grounds or because you disagree with
    > the analysis or sentiments expressed in RFC 1984?

    >> Documents that refer to this RFC informationally would all need to be
    >> considered for potential impact.

    > I just did a review of all RFCs that refer to RFC 1984 explicitly [0]

    > -------------

    > The RFCs are:

    >  * RFC 2804 ("IETF Policy on Wiretapping")

It might make sense to turn this into a BCP.

I agree with your analysis (in particular as the author of 4322, I agree)

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email