Re: Proposed IESG statement on referencing documents behind a paywall

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Fri, 14 June 2019 11:52 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8DCE12004F for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 04:52:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.71
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.71 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com
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 eRmIEremUUfq for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 04:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A24B012002F for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 04:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050096.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x5EBm3XI026408; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 12:51:56 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=6kaTc54f109TQhgbyG39MvJufPYLsaGnD1Tix4t/kMs=; b=Ky+s+Vxag0aRZInSWJYqHzKPq/jPofvGU/v1kOS+v4UDqDSuSmC0LlsxNed90fQ+rL68 29gRNlvwJpR3uv2S+L2JK4hAnQKIn8xIUrjXPcCiABB+WE3DppZ7enIO2UOhP+gNSpCs liyd8reKDpSNA848IPN40oA+ZzQf//tMfONKI2ZDJLcfmpbPsv6W+Nx5+qKMAugG5/fV YURmoU8b0liJq5jnhWBMl/wlyQO6KGYTnhxmsrM9+lFwy7xXk6kVhjdI4fomZvVVAnpx 9gxjDCVnMvnxtHyFWGBZPoedDj6MI2E0R1fAYcQdalM3E+FD7rv9hvlLhi9RYFGrlsTb qQ==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint1 (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [184.51.33.18] (may be forged)) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2t3ky5m7hw-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 14 Jun 2019 12:51:56 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x5EBlajl012756; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 07:51:55 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.57]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2t08bxp7hu-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 14 Jun 2019 07:51:55 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 07:51:54 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1473.004; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 07:51:54 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>
CC: "wgchairs@ietf.org" <wgchairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Proposed IESG statement on referencing documents behind a paywall
Thread-Topic: Proposed IESG statement on referencing documents behind a paywall
Thread-Index: AQHVIWpDXbRnI/uCA0aoaZVscaWGlqaYyCYAgAIJswCAADpxAA==
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 11:51:54 +0000
Message-ID: <36C25208-E1F4-4C54-8ECC-FA94F9681127@akamai.com>
References: <7A67EAB1-08D4-4901-8A43-0563C64EBA1B@gmail.com> <B89005E7-DE45-4DF3-B7B6-4F348E61B483@akamai.com> <160A2188-8B57-497C-B5D1-3645940A04EC@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <160A2188-8B57-497C-B5D1-3645940A04EC@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.1a.0.190609
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.33.85]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <FE5E760573D57445AFE0089A94E20BDF@akamai.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-06-14_06:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=821 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1906140100
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-06-14_06:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=859 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1906140100
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/QD9RmJJBhUY3dPBHKT_cQq_fHfo>
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs/>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 11:52:02 -0000

 
    > Would this affect the IANA registries?  I think those should also be called out explicitly.
   
  
>    Can you clarify? Is this about drafts creating IANA registries? I would think that the registration policy would be the right place to handle this.

Yes that makes sense.  But perhaps the IESG statement should tell WG members to address this issue in drafts that create registries.