Re: [GNAP] Concerns with the lack of progression of GNAP after 20 months of work

Leif Johansson <> Tue, 01 March 2022 16:36 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35CC3A0D06 for <>; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 08:36:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.11
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.11 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=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vysjdjUPYBKS for <>; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 08:36:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 511C23A0D0E for <>; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 08:36:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id l12so10727112ljh.12 for <>; Tue, 01 Mar 2022 08:36:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:from:subject:to:references :content-language:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XLtLwjrTGt7LcIvtuySwP7agB/ExLIEVAV40affqS3I=; b=daqKMxoXgiMILjTiblp9pcq1hsVeBf5/L8h2UXsRyjf/SD+vwBrz1VWuct1U+ETDJ0 tc4dR/2Tn97U46iyf1m5rM8H4F5jpZq/e4E0MButtQxsD+1ftCiqiIjzVBDFo7IdoLH8 gLPSGRMlkEy1io01hnJaNF9p+tpi3KZMKpOOWyyBJ1s/vNvxKOiMjufVELvNZYtHffNW DJE0aqPsZXEmKp5+T49oaot5jXeATfhyFLotAYqQeFcKSrML7mNjQ/ADaiBFCs6CjuZq vT/4irPu/xBvn/fUGqDNUK0L2rrBXYbU90uLvppssQVEgfxVv0wFyqT5N6b8mmBFgHKZ Knsg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:from :subject:to:references:content-language:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=XLtLwjrTGt7LcIvtuySwP7agB/ExLIEVAV40affqS3I=; b=Sbs3tQtoZ51Pito0w0uDyGydGPAJ6PilFRnCzmBlp4DV+q9rQIvBSux01n47Ppi6+9 PfQcH1qu2F0PSqmdvKA6kYVxvD9x2JAaj6/PxYgWjo/A8xVxW8fs523JjSOfYOB33vvy df6t8pV5pNHWehv7p5bVvhVYQR2Oy5NUntwT5Gvqwa+dL2V8NT70IhDlIbfP4GuGLPzE k9bXlH4OOlzbbl6fnQBuCzTPnwRC699ZIlYQF0ukTfKljEZOAG0Q3CeZijFBZvUe8Tjk QZ2y0BPGkXsxCCg9dD7RvBx7+21IZJn46F9o3SEcGNWkV9NFaCTGWRRVUg1jV6UrUy38 8hMA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533N3M+3UHTxQgivqbyBfiLRLdXX2hbD7E0FxJ5FzVLMOT2sl/mH OpCoCsHn9AVNpxAnZ0E7mqD4/Bd/I772VQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxvcwQmCXmtnysC21klCNeC2teyiNVgZ0K1M8D+cORO4HctXY1r6Z40cRE5POqV9nQIKu/7AA==
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b525:0:b0:246:204c:3392 with SMTP id z5-20020a2eb525000000b00246204c3392mr17441450ljm.179.1646152571519; Tue, 01 Mar 2022 08:36:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ([]) by with ESMTPSA id u8-20020ac251c8000000b004458c1d1462sm1309890lfm.142.2022. for <> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 01 Mar 2022 08:36:11 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2022 17:36:09 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0
From: Leif Johansson <>
References: <> <> <>
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [GNAP] Concerns with the lack of progression of GNAP after 20 months of work
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: GNAP <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2022 16:36:22 -0000

On 2022-03-01 14:30, Denis wrote:
> Fabien,
> It is not useful to send flames.


As chair I am wary of unsubstantiated comments in WG discussions. This is one such
case: Fabien was not "sending flames" by any reasonable definition of the term.

As a chair I am also aqutely aware of the fact that while you have written up your
comments as an I-D (as we advised you to do) there have not been any indication
of substantive support from the WG of this work whatsoever.

This means that you are in the rough here. I am not telling you to stop making
contributions but it is pretty clear that the WG does not agree with your views
and you can't force people to agree with you in the IETF.

If you wish to continue talking about your draft I encourage that but the txauth
list is not the place for that. If you want to make contributions to the current
active drafts in txauth that do not assume adoption of your draft or your point
of view then pls continue.

	Best R