Re: [urn] [Gen-art] Review: draft-martin-urn-globus-02

Hello all,

Thanks for your feedback. Speaking for Globus, we're open to making 
whatever changes the reviewers feel are necessary. If you'd be more 
comfortable with an extra line or two of justification in the "Namespace 
Considerations" section, we're happy to add that.

If we do make revisions, does the review process have to start over? Or 
can we proceed from this stage after addressing concerns?

Best,
Brendan McCollam

On 03/17/2016 01:37 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:
> (Adding the IESG)
>
> I’m open to any solution in this matter. We could bypass the requirement. Or we could add a sentence either about the non-sufficiency of the current spaces, or about the upcoming change in process. Or we could add a reference to the new process.
>
> What would you suggest, Barry?
>
> Jari
>
> On 17 Mar 2016, at 13:02, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
>
>> In general, I completely agree with you on that.  That's why I didn't
>> say we should use the new process, but, rather, that on the particular
>> point you raise, we shouldn't be that rigorous right now.
>>
>> b
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
>>> I guess this is between Barry, Jari, and the IESG.
>>>
>>> If it were me, it would seem that a document using a new and
>>> not-yet-approved process would require a normative reference to the new
>>> process, and could not take effect until the new process was approved.
>>>
>>> Yours,
>>> Joel
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/17/16 8:50 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:
>>>> What I'll say abut this, as responsible AD, is that the
>>>> almost-finished urnbis work has updated the registration procedure and
>>>> the registration template, and the "Namespace Considerations", along
>>>> with the requirement that it "outlines the perceived need for a new
>>>> namespace", is no longer there.  That update (see
>>>> draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc2141bis-urn, Section 6.4 and Appendix A) is not
>>>> yet finished and so isn't official, but the intent is clear and the
>>>> last call of this document has been posted to the urnbis working group
>>>> for review against the old+new requirements.
>>>>
>>>> My view is that we should not be too rigorous about this point at this
>>>> stage.
>>>>
>>>> Barry
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 5:15 AM, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> wrote:
>>>>> Thanks, Joel.
>>>>>
>>>>> Authors, any responses to this? I think we need to discuss this…
>>>>>
>>>>> Jari
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12 Feb 2016, at 00:26, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
>>>>>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
>>>>>> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
>>>>>> like any other last call comments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Document: draft-martin-urn-globus-02
>>>>>>   A URN Namespace for Globus
>>>>>> Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
>>>>>> Review Date: 11-Feb-2016
>>>>>> IETF LC End Date: 9-March-2016
>>>>>> IESG Telechat date: 17-March-2016
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Summary: This document is nearly ready for publication as an
>>>>>> informational RFC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This reviewer assumes that the appropriate message has been or will be
>>>>>> sent to urn-nid@apps.ietf.org.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Major issues:
>>>>>>   As per the pointer in this document to RFC 3406 section 4.3, this
>>>>>> document is required to have a Namespace Considerations section which
>>>>>> "outlines the perceived need for a new namespace (i.e., where existing
>>>>>> namespaces fall short of the proposer's requirements)."  While there is a
>>>>>> section called Namespace Considerations, what it lists is the envisioned
>>>>>> usages, not the reasons existing name spaces are insufficient.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Minor issues: N/A
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nits/editorial comments: N/A
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> urn mailing list
>>>>>> urn@ietf.org
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn
>>>>>