Re: [secdir] Security review of draft-ietf-dnsop-onion-tld-00.txt

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

Supporting one point about updating the draft:

>> At the suggestions of Mark Nottingham & Richard Barnes (cc:) we have
>> refrained from issuing revisions to the draft because of the impending
>> 2015-09-03 IESG telechat, in order that discussion does not derail for
>> pursuit of a moving target
>
> Comments from other ADs are asking about the comments that have not
> been addressed.  The effect of this is that the ADs are reviewing and
> don't know if outstanding comments from reviewers in last call will be
> addressed.  I recommend asking the sponsoring AD if you could upload a
> new version today.  I didn't cast my ballot after reading it yet as
> the SecDir review wasn't addressed and Christian had some good points.
>
> If we at least had a version to look at that addressed the points, it
> would help some of us... even if it's posted elsewhere.

I really don't understand the allergy that some of us seem to have
toward updating drafts.  The fact that people are reviewing the draft
shouldn't matter.  Why, if there are updates pending, should anyone
consider it more useful to continue to have people review an old
version, when we could be posting a new one for review?  It makes no
sense to me, but it's common advice.

I suggest we encourage people to post revisions when they think it
would be useful, and only hold back under specific circumstances that
we think merit an unchanging draft for a while (such as, we have
updates proposed but they're still being batted around and aren't
ready to commit yet).

I'd rather have people reviewing the latest version, rather than
re-raising things that were already discussed and addressed.

Barry