Re: [urn] [Gen-art] Review: draft-martin-urn-globus-02
Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Thu, 17 March 2016 13:38 UTC
Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Original-To: expand-draft-martin-urn-globus.all@virtual.ietf.org
Delivered-To: urn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 65534) id CCA4412D94D; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 06:38:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: xfilter-draft-martin-urn-globus.all@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xfilter-draft-martin-urn-globus.all@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6D2212DBE4; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 06:38:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 L7SALHAnEXmW; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 06:38:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E914712D94D; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 06:38:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D472CCBF; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 15:38:16 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ArArTA5wsLXa; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 15:38:16 +0200 (EET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4838E2CC9A; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 15:38:04 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJKfpLcimD5x4Bc4mUOj12n0+=+NP3vhVTPfo=XUuCSQyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 13:37:57 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <170D9352-DF63-4EE2-985F-B7B026DB5890@piuha.net>
References: <56BD072F.4080905@nostrum.com> <56BD269D.1040703@joelhalpern.com> <DD2D5D2A-FF56-4048-9BBA-C2F17F04CBF3@piuha.net> <CALaySJJy-mvyY5GnCPcuQ0qxsZvOQnqhcKBo0nf+dM8uVHZ2pQ@mail.gmail.com> <56EAA9AD.2070808@joelhalpern.com> <CALaySJKfpLcimD5x4Bc4mUOj12n0+=+NP3vhVTPfo=XUuCSQyA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/urn/KPDQH0uu7PXO3qa8YFIynoyMk2o>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 12:53:19 -0700
Cc: draft-martin-urn-globus.all@ietf.org, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, iesg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [urn] [Gen-art] Review: draft-martin-urn-globus-02
X-BeenThere: urn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Revisions to URN RFCs <urn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/urn>, <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/urn/>
List-Post: <mailto:urn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/urn>, <mailto:urn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 13:38:28 -0000
(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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>
- [urn] [Gen-art] Review: draft-martin-urn-globus-02 Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [urn] [Gen-art] Review: draft-martin-urn-glob… Jari Arkko
- Re: [urn] [Gen-art] Review: draft-martin-urn-glob… Dale R. Worley
- Re: [urn] [Gen-art] Review: draft-martin-urn-glob… Barry Leiba
- Re: [urn] [Gen-art] Review: draft-martin-urn-glob… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [urn] [Gen-art] Review: draft-martin-urn-glob… Barry Leiba
- Re: [urn] [Gen-art] Review: draft-martin-urn-glob… Jari Arkko
- Re: [urn] [Gen-art] Review: draft-martin-urn-glob… Brendan McCollam
- Re: [urn] [Gen-art] Review: draft-martin-urn-glob… Barry Leiba