ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Fwd: [Ianaplan] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-06.txt> (Draft Response to the Internet Coordination Group Request for Proposals on the IANA protocol parameters registries) to Informational RFC

2014-12-16 06:26:14
This is the second forwarded message.

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Richard Hill" <rhill(_at_)hill-a(_dot_)ch>
Subject: RE: [Ianaplan] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-06.txt> 
(Draft Response to the Internet Coordination Group Request for Proposals on 
the IANA protocol parameters registries) to Informational RFC
Date: 11 Dec 2014 06:39:11 EST
To: "Jari Arkko" <jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net>
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org, iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Reply-To: rhill(_at_)hill-a(_dot_)ch

Dear Jari,

Thank you for this.  I do understand the consensus call is a judgement call.
But, as I understand RFC 7282, a justification should be provided for the
judgement call. And that is what I am requesting.

Regarding the "sheperd writeup", I have requested some changes, see:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01415.html

Regarding the IESG, that body requested comments, and that is why I
submitted my comments to the IETF list.

Best,
Richard

-----Original Message-----
From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net]
Sent: mercredi, 10. décembre 2014 11:28
To: rhill(_at_)hill-a(_dot_)ch
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Last Call:
<draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-06.txt> (Draft Response to the
Internet Coordination Group Request for Proposals on the IANA protocol
parameters registries) to Informational RFC


Richard,

On 27 November, I requested that the co-chairs provide a
justification for
the conclusion that rough consensus has been achieved, see:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01402.html

The requested justification has not yet been provided.

Calling the consensus is a judgment call. For what it is worth, I
have been
quite satisfied with the chairs and the document shepherd reading the
opinions of the group. Their thoughts have been discussed in the thread
“draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response moving to next step”, see the thread
beginning at

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01401.html

See in particular this e-mail:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01406.html

as well as the shepherd writeup:


https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response/shepherdwr
iteup/

Also, for information, the IESG has not yet considered this draft. But they
will. Right now it's in IETF last call, the outcome of which will first be
evaluated by the responsible AD, in this case me. And then by the IESG
as a whole. At that point the IESG will determine if there have been any
process or other issues that need consideration or action.

Jari




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>