IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-06: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Thu, 19 October 2017 00:55 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.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 7130C133528; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 17:55:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.88
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.88 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 ESUkLNNKMs8U; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 17:55:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 1F1AA126B6E; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 17:55:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.82] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v9J0tLfX005332 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 18 Oct 2017 19:55:21 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.82]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.0 \(3445.1.7\))
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949362FCE69AE@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 19:55:03 -0500
Cc: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk" <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, "draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation@ietf.org>, "tsvwg-chairs@ietf.org" <tsvwg-chairs@ietf.org>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1BFC585F-914E-423B-BA14-DF3D930AEB3B@nostrum.com>
References: <150656006611.13804.15109883563794101461.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949362FCE3AC7@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com> <5528580C-EBDD-4EE9-9F3E-BFAF51F617AA@fastmail.fm> <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949362FCE69AE@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com>
To: "Black, David" <David.Black@dell.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.1.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/UqgJ1ksJX5xuX0mhAZym11QHB3s>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation-06: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 00:55:31 -0000

https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/independent/ confirms Alexey’s comment.

Does that mean this draft should explicitly require IETF stream experimental RFCs? 

Thanks!

Ben.

> On Oct 18, 2017, at 4:38 PM, Black, David <David.Black@dell.com> wrote:
> 
> That's a surprise, at least to me - I'm reasonably certain that we don't want to see this sort of experimentation done via ISE stream RFCs.
> 
> Thanks, --David
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alexey Melnikov [mailto:aamelnikov@fastmail.fm]
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 2:21 PM
>> To: Black, David <david.black@emc.com>
>> Cc: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>; The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>;
>> gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk; draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-experimentation@ietf.org;
>> tsvwg-chairs@ietf.org; tsvwg@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-
>> experimentation-06: (with COMMENT)
>> 
>> On 17 Oct 2017, at 22:49, Black, David <David.Black@dell.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> Speaking of which, there are several references to requiring experimental
>> RFCs.
>>>> Are those expected to be IETF stream RFCs?
>>> [David>] Yes, independent submissions (ISE stream) RFCs are
>> Informational, and cannot be published as Experimental.
>> 
>> Independent Stream RFCs can be Informational or Experimental.
>> 
>

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status