Re: [xmpp] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-xmpp-posh-04: (with COMMENT)

"Ben Campbell" <ben@nostrum.com> Fri, 28 August 2015 15:16 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB1CA1B3660; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable
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 YervRNgTfvAY; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:16:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D67FD1B3667; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:16:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.23] (cpe-70-119-203-4.tx.res.rr.com [70.119.203.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id t7SFGRlD022978 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:16:37 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-70-119-203-4.tx.res.rr.com [70.119.203.4] claimed to be [10.0.1.23]
From: "Ben Campbell" <ben@nostrum.com>
To: "Barry Leiba" <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 10:16:26 -0500
Message-ID: <65E92DD7-E2D2-473C-B67A-70B6B6230BDA@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJJdyV1XefB_9rh8Ty8Jn_oQF3Gj0NKEgh6RqfGPY0j98w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150729090441.16993.2639.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <55BACBBF.3060301@andyet.net> <CALaySJ+k6Pt6b6UvhKNYgsk+=nMRfiSocd_T8aatRvLq4Vg+-w@mail.gmail.com> <55BBA4C1.6040404@andyet.net> <CALaySJLWDfRuCdziHSKqPFJ136d3O45Z7JDnYzDfQEZsKUsfdA@mail.gmail.com> <55CA9A10.2080603@andyet.net> <C4930219-3403-4782-869B-2348A7BFBEEB@nostrum.com> <55D3B0D8.2010202@andyet.net> <37FFCBB4-6921-4A6C-91A4-D1569CD96381@nostrum.com> <55DBAE21.3020408@cisco.com> <8C4C868A-B232-4F2B-A6D3-980785C95DB8@nostrum.com> <55DD249A.4080109@andyet.net> <55DFE8C4.7090707@andyet.net> <CALaySJJJP3xNPCW2t5XvN3_W5Rv3jsybiqYme+mhP0+oy7uEqA@mail.gmail.com> <BAAB87F2-319A-4658-823F-429F7718D6E3@nostrum.com> <CALaySJJdyV1XefB_9rh8Ty8Jn_oQF3Gj0NKEgh6RqfGPY0j98w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.2r5107)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xmpp/jR72SJsN0CTQnFRi1bAZDo9iIoc>
Cc: draft-ietf-xmpp-posh.shepherd@ietf.org, xmpp-chairs@ietf.org, xmpp@ietf.org, draft-ietf-xmpp-posh.ad@ietf.org, draft-ietf-xmpp-posh@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [xmpp] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-xmpp-posh-04: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: XMPP Working Group <xmpp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/xmpp/>
List-Post: <mailto:xmpp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 15:16:49 -0000

On 28 Aug 2015, at 9:59, Barry Leiba wrote:

>>>> Before a period of 14 days has passed, the Designated Expert(s) 
>>>> will
>>>> either approve or deny the registration request, communicating this
>>>> decision both to the review list and to IANA.  Denials should 
>>>> include
>>>> an explanation and, if applicable, suggestions as to how to make 
>>>> the
>>>> request successful.  Registration requests that are undetermined 
>>>> for
>>>> a period longer than 21 days can be brought to the IESG's attention
>>>> (using the iesg@iesg.org mailing list) for resolution.
>>
>> Do you expect to have a (perhaps rotating) panel of experts? I think 
>> if we
>> have one or two designated (to IANA) experts, IANA will automatically 
>> do the
>> right thing for any registration attempt, including bugging the ADs 
>> if the
>> experts are non-responsive.
>
> That's true, and it's not necessary to have time periods in there.  On
> the other hand, putting in recommended times does seem to me to be
> useful for setting expectations.
>
> Maybe IANA can comment about whether they like such things, or prefer
> not to be constrained by them.

For what it's worth, the comment also applied to the prior paragraph (to 
the effect that registration requests should be sent to a designated 
mailing list.).