Re: last call discussion status on draft-iab-2870bis

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 3/4/15 9:43 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:
I wanted to come back to the status of the discussions.

We have an ongoing discussion of the changes Marc made on the -02. My read of the feedback is that the update has done the right things, but:

1) Paul Hoffman’s clarifications&  editorial changes seem useful, but I would like to hear what others think.

I think Paul's suggested change to the first paragraph in section 1 is spot on. Now that RSSAC has completed RSSAC001, perhaps something like:

OLD
The operational requirements are defined in [RSSAC-001]. This
document defines the protocol requirements and some deployment
requirements.
NEW
This document only defines the protocol requirements and some
deployment requirements; the operational requirements that were
defined in RFC 2870 are removed. Operational requirements are
now defined by the Root Server System Advisory Committee of ICANN
and are documented in [RSSAC-001].

And then remove the second paragraph of 1.1, which becomes unnecessary.

4) I’ve also received feedback from IESG members that the text about moving 2870 to Historic in Section 1.1 could be problematic. While I’m not sure that is necessarily the case, I think this draft merely replaces 2870, so I am not sure we need to say anything more.

Yeah, I'm one of the folks who thinks "Historic" is unnecessary (and potentially a pain). The fact that this is obsoleting 2870 is sufficient, and all it really needs to do is replace 2870 in the BCP series by adding "BCP: 40 (if approved)" to the top. I'd just make that change and strike section 1.1 entirely.

pr

--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]