Donald,
I think I agree with you. But I do not know what the right answer is.
The document is self contained. The material presented in the IESG Write-ups
represent background about the document.
We always listen and follow the guidance of IETF, and IETF Editor.
Regards
Avygdor Moise
----- Original Message -----
From: "Donald Eastlake" <d3e3e3(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
To: "Avygdor Moise" <avy(_at_)fdos(_dot_)ca>
Cc: "Jonathan Brodkin" <jonathan(_dot_)brodkin(_at_)fdos(_dot_)ca>; <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>; "IESG
IESG" <iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 2:42 PM
Subject: Re: Document Action: 'ANSI C12.22, IEEE 1703 and MC12.22
TransportOver IP' to Informational RFC
If there is something in the IESG write-up that is needed to
understand the nature of a document, that material should also appear
in the document. Most people looking at RFCs probably don't even know
that an IESG write-up might exist or where to find it and even those
who do know about the IESG write-up will assume that the RFC (and
possibly any Errata) are all they need to look at.
This doesn't seem like a big deal. Just take the first two sentences
of the "Working Group Summary" section of the IESG write-up and add
them to the Abstract and/or Introduction, or something like that.
Thanks,
Donald
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Avygdor Moise <avy(_at_)fdos(_dot_)ca> wrote:
Dear Nikos,
I believe that you appropriately addressed the comment and I are in
complete
agreement with your remarks.
I'd would also like to point out that Mr. St. Johns' concerns are also
addressed on the IETF data tracker for this RFC
(http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-c1222-transport-over-ip/), on the
IESG Write-ups tab. Specifically there is a Technical Summary, a Working
Group Summary and a Document Quality section. These sections fully
disclose
and document the origin and the processes used to produce this RFC Draft
and
the qualifications of the contributors.
Sincerely
Avygdor Moise
Chair: ASC C12 SC17, WG2 / ANSI C12.19; IEEE SCC31 / WG P1377
Editor: ASC C12 SC17, WG1/ ANSI C12.22; IEEE SCC31 / WG 1703
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
ext Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 11:49 AM
To: Michael StJohns
Cc: iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Document Action: 'ANSI C12.22, IEEE 1703 and MC12.22
TransportOver IP' to Informational RFC
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Michael StJohns
<mstjohns(_at_)comcast(_dot_)net>
wrote:
> Hi -
> I'm confused about this approval.
> As I read the draft and the approval comments, this document is an
independent submission describing how to do C12.22 over IP. But the
document is without context for "who does this" typical to an
informational RFC.
Is that really typical? Check the MD5 algorithm in [0], I don't see
such boilerplates like "we at RSA security do hashing like that". I
think it is obvious that the authors of the document do that, or
recommend that. I pretty like the current format of informational
RFCs.
[0]. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1321
> Is this
> a) A document describing how the document authors would do this if
they were a standards organization?
> b) A description of how their company does this in their products?
Is your question on what informational RFCs are?
> c) A description of how another standards body (which one????) does
this?
I'd suppose if this was the case it would be mentioned in the document
in question.
> d) A back door attempt to form an international standard within the
IETF without using the traditional IETF working group mechanisms?
How can you know that? When somebody specifies his way of doing
things, is to inform and have interoperability. It might actually
happen that industry follows this approach and ends-up in a de-facto
standard. I see nothing wrong with that.
regards,
Nikos
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf