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

Heather Flanagan <rse@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 20 February 2019 21:49 UTC

Return-Path: <rse@rfc-editor.org>
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 18FF2130E72; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 13:49:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 gx_Iqxdlq-7V; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 13:49:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6D9A128CF3; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 13:49:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE7551C5ACB; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 13:49:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NScFeIlgrVtp; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 13:49:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.198.42.38] (c-71-231-216-10.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [71.231.216.10]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F3121C55DD; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 13:49:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Heather Flanagan <rse@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <F21F402F-ED73-4072-A7D5-F3915BBD2FEF@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1E61A990-6A33-4B13-847B-87E27C23A61E"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 13:49:18 -0800
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-eYF+MhUqvOtRaHkhO8=texevfYi9rgcTPjiseasw1xsA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, tsvwg-chairs <tsvwg-chairs@ietf.org>, tsvwg@ietf.org, Sandy Ginoza <sginoza@amsl.com>
To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <CAKKJt-eYF+MhUqvOtRaHkhO8=texevfYi9rgcTPjiseasw1xsA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/p7VyqTSzf1WrY27XtEWEwlRsVbM>
Subject: Re: [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 21:49:22 -0000

Hi Spencer,

I know it’s rude to answer a question with a question… but I have a few questions.

Draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb is not in our queue yet, right? Will it become part of C238 when it is in our queue? 

When the text in draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos is changed, will that text then be removed from draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb? 

Will there still be any kind of Updates relationship between draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb and draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos when this change is made?

If draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb is not in our queue and will not be part of C238, then I think an RFC Editor Note would be very useful for that draft. If we haven’t started editing draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos, then an RFC Editor Note there would be useful to. I defer to Sandy, though, as to what the editors will find most useful to make sure this change is captured during the editing process.


Thanks,
Heather

> On Feb 20, 2019, at 12:59 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear Heather,
> 
> The IESG has https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb/ <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 <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