IETF Logo Mail Archive

[tsvwg] MISSREF*R(1G) document in C238 has been overtaken by draft in IESG Evaluation - what now? :-)

Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 20 February 2019 20:59 UTC

Return-Path: <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA720130DC4; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 12:59:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 Q_THTETNdZQL; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 12:59:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com (mail-lj1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::232]) (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 7CD5A12950A; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 12:59:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id q128so22000739ljb.11; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 12:59:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hHZt/EX3aozR1+TRJJytt38R4iARSAmYNqy+EQUZnkc=; b=CXGmql7wA0SYMXSRb8HKmzeLs0KfRRZTkpz/SNHl2Qb6JkVNoFW4rzmODNgaqE56/x hH90D56x44ykL1xdrE1ay42Pv2u/BL/X1Ls0khPalIuHcfpMEOR7tB7m44wj/5EYy0xU q1Bavhu+XWjSauZ265H9xM404QoL3y8GyeoFnJlwM5KuDIUXvePz3ojkRXtR/lFvl19v NqqwAG2gvfe0h4MHj3RMWNPcH6McZSJ2qPYq4OkQtD0fJanqkH3GkZHYF6XgeDYew7VD mgU6EGpqHqURIjMJOQhE2EmTBoNYYgwAHvQfgO/3Q5BbtK4e2SRC9fUsUA8ENrb/QAd7 tWiw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hHZt/EX3aozR1+TRJJytt38R4iARSAmYNqy+EQUZnkc=; b=f4F+b56KMgOJD/maGAst3ZgjbzXbrDrtQvMnYF6Hqy5fcIXWpMvY4fFO7xcEmN8ivs pAmXm9ssqcEh2oI3/ZPlD11r9oQClK8q4kqiy62tgExd3c69c25k7x8saMguIYUWjZBa WEHDnLtxXEGASPKedB+VeZW6T4cfp5nZlq0HjSHyJY6diPW8pfS+ThB3Oc2leLtOfz5I kYn3eSRLaZqRI09jBSZnGiY1NrK606oR52BUf7AuR6VNiK5QAM0b7r3kEeTivhq3dI8U VGgR1Au9b1oTtLsXJFsSAuMmNjHUdlYZMIzV0i+bw4mhyZc/nSS8P7fuoNVuWI4nJvjd /tZQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAub6T01C9fVL3zsZNfJlRCja1g7OAdVBYypGTI2kVAXFSSCqbeGy 2HI2ERzFl4ktvShmCMcyf/+Mx7nWJoZXpJBJ4WHj9j+tqzc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IZ5lf4MBEwow+Z/T57cOBIWKFMtoEoijT18U2eO5cBli57F4y2g+a7WMpAPQWMBCog5+zddAQ8QBKh7ulBFmM4=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9b95:: with SMTP id z21mr4474407lji.155.1550696357459; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 12:59:17 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 14:59:07 -0600
Message-ID: <CAKKJt-eYF+MhUqvOtRaHkhO8=texevfYi9rgcTPjiseasw1xsA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" <rse@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, tsvwg-chairs <tsvwg-chairs@ietf.org>, tsvwg@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008a7f0f058259a17e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/NV2x9wf-_qL3RfbknciMxSvZPdU>
Subject: [tsvwg] MISSREF*R(1G) document in C238 has been overtaken by draft in IESG Evaluation - what now? :-)
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 20:59:22 -0000

Dear Heather,

The IESG has https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb/ in
IESG Evaluation for this week's telechat, and this draft
updates draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos, which I'm sure you recognize because
it's in Cluster C238, and has been hanging in the RFC Editor queue for some
number of years.

We THINK we don't want to have draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos published as an
RFC and immediately have another RFC published that updates it - right?

We THINK the instructions in
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb-09#section-12 describe
the changes to draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos clearly.

What is the proper way for the IESG to tell the RFC Editor to go ahead and
make the changes to draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos?

Our guesses include, but are not limited to,

   - Adding an RFC Editor Note to draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb (the draft with
   instructions about updating draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos)
   - Adding an RFC Editor Note to draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos (the draft to
   be updated)
   - Sending an e-mail to the RFC Editor requesting that the text changes
   be applied to draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos before it is published

but I bet that you know what will make live easiest for you and the RFC
editor staff ... please let me know.

Thanks,

Spencer

Spencer

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email