IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [yam] preliminary -- draft-ietf-yam-rfc1652bis-pre-evaluation

Tony Hansen <tony@att.com> Fri, 14 August 2009 19:13 UTC

Return-Path: <tony@att.com>
X-Original-To: yam@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: yam@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3AB83A6DA8 for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 12:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.297
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.297 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.302, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VLvlRrimte9Q for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 12:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail120.messagelabs.com (mail120.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.83]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A6973A6D73 for <yam@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 12:13:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: tony@att.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-12.tower-120.messagelabs.com!1250277192!47808169!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.1.3; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [144.160.112.25]
Received: (qmail 31540 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2009 19:13:12 -0000
Received: from sbcsmtp3.sbc.com (HELO tlph064.enaf.dadc.sbc.com) (144.160.112.25) by server-12.tower-120.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 14 Aug 2009 19:13:12 -0000
Received: from enaf.dadc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by tlph064.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n7EJDCbU025445 for <yam@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:13:12 -0500
Received: from klpd017.kcdc.att.com (klpd017.kcdc.att.com [135.188.40.86]) by tlph064.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n7EJD6NX024801 for <yam@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:13:06 -0500
Received: from kcdc.att.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by klpd017.kcdc.att.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n7EJD69X007513 for <yam@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:13:06 -0500
Received: from maillennium.att.com (dns.maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by klpd017.kcdc.att.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n7EJD2qF007374 for <yam@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:13:02 -0500
Received: from [135.70.144.73] (vpn-135-70-144-73.vpn.mwst.att.com[135.70.144.73]) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with ESMTP id <20090814191301gw1003ib37e> (Authid: tony); Fri, 14 Aug 2009 19:13:02 +0000
X-Originating-IP: [135.70.144.73]
Message-ID: <4A85B73E.6030201@att.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:13:02 -0400
From: Tony Hansen <tony@att.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: yam@ietf.org
References: <4A848309.8020107@dcrocker.net> <4A848FD4.6080601@att.com> <4A84B8DF.4020107@dcrocker.net> <4A84BD5C.9010000@att.com> <4A8577E2.3020908@dcrocker.net> <4A85A390.6050104@att.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20090814111028.0320b218@resistor.net> <4A85B24C.30205@dcrocker.net>
In-Reply-To: <4A85B24C.30205@dcrocker.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [yam] preliminary -- draft-ietf-yam-rfc1652bis-pre-evaluation
X-BeenThere: yam@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Yet Another Mail working group discussion list <yam.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yam>
List-Post: <mailto:yam@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 19:13:09 -0000

6 of one ....

I'm happy with either place

	Tony

Dave CROCKER wrote:
> 
> 
> SM wrote:
>> Shouldn't that be in Section 2 under "Proposed changes" as it is part 
>> of the preliminary evaluation report?
> 
> yeah, that probably makes more sense.
> 
> 
>> As the I-D will not only be processed by the IESG, a IANA 
>> Considerations section is not a requirement.
> 
> right.
> 
> d/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email