Re: [VCARDDAV] progressing the 'device' KIND

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Thu, 13 September 2012 15:03 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A011521F85C6 for <vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 08:03:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ls9gDbICPXeP for <vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 08:03:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D75621F8539 for <vcarddav@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 08:03:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [64.101.72.115] (unknown [64.101.72.115]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A42A84005A; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:04:33 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <5051EFCC.1090905@stpeter.im>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 08:38:04 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Peter Sheerin <Peter@PetesGuide.com>
References: <504A160F.90006@stpeter.im> <504F53C6.2050506@PetesGuide.com>
In-Reply-To: <504F53C6.2050506@PetesGuide.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: vcarddav@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [VCARDDAV] progressing the 'device' KIND
X-BeenThere: vcarddav@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF vcarddav wg mailing list <vcarddav.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/vcarddav>, <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vcarddav>
List-Post: <mailto:vcarddav@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vcarddav>, <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 15:03:50 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 9/11/12 9:07 AM, Peter Sheerin wrote:
> Can you briefly describe the differences between this progressing
> as a WG item vs. AD?

For a draft like this, the differences are minor. We will have a
4-week IETF Last Call instead of a 2-week Working Group Last Call
followed by a 2-week IETF Last Call. There will never be a consensus
call in the VCARDDAV WG for adoption of the document as a WG item, so
it will never have a draft name like draft-ietf-vcarddav-kind-device.
Working group participants and other interested individuals will still
have an opportunity to provide feedback during IETF Last Call. Etc.

> And will this be submitted for final approval on the 21st, or will
> there be further opportunities to modify it?

After the 21st, the authors will incorporate the feedback we've
received and publish a revised I-D. We will also ask our document
shepherd to provide a write-up to the sponsoring area director. Once
he has done that, the AD will complete his own review and perhaps
provide further comments, which the authors will incorporate, perhaps
resulting in another revised I-D. The AD will then request a 4-week
IETF Last Call. More comments might be made and specialized reviews
(SecDir, Gen-ART, AppsDir) might occur, as a result of which the
authors might submit yet another revised I-D. The AD will then
schedule the document for discussion and balloting by the IESG;
feedback from IESG members might result in yet another revised I-D. If
it is approved for publication by the IESG, it will then go to the RFC
Editor team, which will prepare it for publication as an RFC (further
modifications might result at this point during the "AUTH48" phase,
which is the last chance for the authors to make minor changes).

Anyway, that's the short version of how an AD-sponsored I-D becomes an
RFC. :)

Peter

> On 2012-09-07 08:43, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: We've had discussion
> here about draft-salgueiro-vcarddav-kind-device, which specifies a
> vCard KIND of 'device' (split out from the 'application' KIND last
> year). Pete Resnick, the responsible AD for the VCCARDAV WG, has
> agreed to AD-sponsor this document, so it will not be progressing
> as a WG item. However, we last discussed it on this list back in
> April, so feedback on version -02 would be helpful to make sure
> that it's in good shape. Therefore, consider this an informal last
> call for comments from the vCard community. If you could send your
> feedback in the next two weeks (before September 21st) that would
> be great.
> 
> The spec can be found here:
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-salgueiro-vcarddav-kind-device/
>
>  Thanks!
> 
> Peter
> 
> -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
> 
> 
>> _______________________________________________ VCARDDAV mailing
>> list VCARDDAV@ietf.org 
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vcarddav
> 
> _______________________________________________ VCARDDAV mailing
> list VCARDDAV@ietf.org 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vcarddav
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlBR78wACgkQNL8k5A2w/vyzLACgrdHARvAUmI7EMIOVe8DRObca
erUAoKjtEOae4E0ZauSbXReK8oEur1y4
=5XoH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----