IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Terminology] TERM & NISTIR 8366

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Thu, 06 May 2021 08:04 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
X-Original-To: terminology@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: terminology@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EC8A3A1745 for <terminology@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 May 2021 01:04:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
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 B3NBkyolSS_x for <terminology@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 May 2021 01:04:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B98873A1739 for <terminology@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 May 2021 01:04:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:914f:444:a0b5:54d5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C7255600352; Thu, 6 May 2021 11:04:16 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1620288256; bh=xQbkgaBUfEd/46gNrA8OCCJ6gaUhvzIYXseBoS/PcmQ=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=ZcM1OcNM3bgVkUDfuw8fVf/JgJcl4qnvKhMZiCs0y6xug4O1wJBcc4gb8C1WORxju K4ehT1jCSf7lzr8e/mSCBO7RDx02DgV51p48lvDv/6Ji/SKwh3VftBACZCbmR17qBp 9eI7z1DJn+gYwBaIS1RITS6sT2kqiq+F23tG9SDw=
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-Id: <32ACE23D-1C5E-4203-B5E0-D0F58B02803E@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7A48131E-982F-48BC-ADE2-B020AB2BC3D7"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.80.0.2.43\))
Date: Thu, 06 May 2021 11:04:16 +0300
In-Reply-To: <C089DE1B-61FF-4091-A4D7-0F33ED05A565@akamai.com>
Cc: Lloyd W <lloyd.wood=40yahoo.co.uk@dmarc.ietf.org>, Dan York <york@isoc.org>, "terminology@ietf.org" <terminology@ietf.org>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
References: <2C2B2441-DFE2-4C9F-AC21-48B6A8736329@isoc.org> <5D6D75AB-1E9E-4CB3-A86B-6D8EAA37BB14@yahoo.co.uk> <C089DE1B-61FF-4091-A4D7-0F33ED05A565@akamai.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.80.0.2.43)
X-MailScanner-ID: C7255600352.AF779
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/terminology/RQy_V5VHosc_iTwQCitHSHWKfw0>
Subject: Re: [Terminology] TERM & NISTIR 8366
X-BeenThere: terminology@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Effective Terminology in IETF Documents <terminology.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/terminology>, <mailto:terminology-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/terminology/>
List-Post: <mailto:terminology@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:terminology-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/terminology>, <mailto:terminology-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 May 2021 08:04:37 -0000

Hi,

On 2021-5-5, at 17:09, Salz, Rich <rsalz=40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Lars proposed abandoning the work on *chartering* the group.  I, and others, do not want that abandoned until there is some indication that the various parties he proposed have actually adopted the NIST document.

I plan to leave the TERM group in its current state (as "chartering") at least until the IESG statement pointing to NISTIR 8366 is out, I've sent NIST a liaison statement informing them of our use of NISTIR 8366, and have gotten acknowledgements from the various other RFC streams and the RFC Editor that they have received the IESG's suggestion to put similar guidance in place.

(I have seen an indication from the RFC Editor that they plan to do so already.)

Thanks,
Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email