IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tao-discuss] [Gendispatch] Requests for IETF 114

Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Fri, 03 June 2022 15:19 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: tao-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tao-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C53EDC14CF09; Fri, 3 Jun 2022 08:19:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.006
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.006 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.876, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.com
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 NMvbGaD8xEFY; Fri, 3 Jun 2022 08:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBE9BC14CF08; Fri, 3 Jun 2022 08:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4LF64H2G5pz1ntx8; Fri, 3 Jun 2022 08:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1654269567; bh=uDomVHx0iltETCf2eE+jfmHjTZBebUkyfN2v/a4HOhk=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=IX2dwJlRGJaYgmjzjfkWz1fHDP/vODFAoFqQfKn2A7JC4Hi2tqvqjNxkZvENQCeGw PmV4hJDnJHiLBudy8icQJRt8d9N/3f7T0blz0yaC0cMZXEocISUwYhgViaVIgx6gUG 4d/RaMZf+JxOct3OwyDUYceHOr2Xm9OkpW+IFYAg=
X-Quarantine-ID: <nvt6pBS6Dq-f>
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.23.181] (50-233-136-230-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.233.136.230]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4LF64F414fz1pVyp; Fri, 3 Jun 2022 08:19:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <48a0df92-497a-6747-a8e6-ba93abc7f3d8@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2022 11:19:23 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: Brian Rosen <br@brianrosen.net>, Rich Salz <rsalz@akamai.com>
Cc: "gendispatch@ietf.org" <gendispatch@ietf.org>, "tao-discuss@ietf.org" <tao-discuss@ietf.org>
References: <CAC9wnY-03+ToGL4KjjRaXBquxV2DeBaax67bxJB9qZEj=PSELg@mail.gmail.com> <89DAA7D5-3DF6-4B42-A3F0-7698F550C5B0@eggert.org> <36AFC944-59F3-49CC-AFEF-4471476F1913@eggert.org> <CB175E16-812E-4288-886B-B7FC82756720@akamai.com> <5C314F03-0C3D-4E1C-9AFE-BBCE8F775D8F@brianrosen.net> <7712AEA2-DDB3-4915-A060-9F3CACA9435E@akamai.com> <EB02214C-8DCC-41C1-A266-08A042AE6318@brianrosen.net>
From: Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
In-Reply-To: <EB02214C-8DCC-41C1-A266-08A042AE6318@brianrosen.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tao-discuss/S319Xea4U7MwLdfC5ruzZTHz5lg>
Subject: Re: [tao-discuss] [Gendispatch] Requests for IETF 114
X-BeenThere: tao-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of the Tao of the IETF <tao-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tao-discuss>, <mailto:tao-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tao-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tao-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tao-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tao-discuss>, <mailto:tao-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2022 15:19:31 -0000

Agreeing with Brian.  The document has to reflect the community 
understanding of the process.  So it needs community and IETF review.  
At that point, it sure sounds like an informational RFC.

And, we conducted the experiment of not having it be an RFC, and that 
did not address the goal of more frequent revisions.  So lets call the 
experiment a useful data point and use our existing mechanisms.

Yours,

Joel

On 6/3/2022 11:12 AM, Brian Rosen wrote:
> That seems to be a distinction without a difference, because, I think, it ought to get an IETF-wide review, and, I think, the IESG should review it.
>
>
>> On Jun 3, 2022, at 10:03 AM, Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>    Dunno, ISTM that the simplest, most straightforward solution is just make the TAO an RFC again.
>> I very strongly believe that this misses the point.  "It is not a formal IETF process document but instead an informational overview."
>>
>>

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status