From nobody Thu Dec 9 19:41:10 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5266E3A1918 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 19:41:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 1vc5sBJZbaSI for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 19:41:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from turing.pensive.org (turing.pensive.org [99.111.97.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A1AB3A1914 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 19:41:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from [99.111.97.136] (99.111.97.161) by turing.pensive.org with ESMTP (EIMS X 3.3.9); Thu, 9 Dec 2021 19:41:32 -0800 From: "Randall Gellens" To: "Brian Rosen" , ecrit@ietf.org Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 19:41:02 -0800 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673) Message-ID: <938A885A-1883-4B75-814F-98D11DAED2D9@randy.pensive.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; markup=markdown Archived-At: Subject: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-planned-changes-05 X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 03:41:09 -0000 Below is a list of both substantive and editorial comments: (1) In the first paragraph of Section 1 (Introduction), consider some rewording for clarification: Old: Prior to the change, a Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO) specifying a civic location in the affected area would have a blank A3 element, or would contain some other value; after the change, a PIDF-LO specifying the same location would contain an A3 element set to the name of the municipality that annexed that part of the county/district. New: Prior to the change, a valid Presence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO) specifying a civic location in the affected area might have an A3 element that is blank or contains the name of some other municipality; after the change, a valid PIDF-LO specifying the same location will contain an A3 element set to the name of the municipality that annexed that part of the county/district. (2) In the second paragraph of Section 1, please expand "LIS" prior to its first use, and also consider adding s small bit of explanatory text. Old: Records in a LIS New: A Location Information Server (LIS) maintains location information on devices/clients and typically uses the Location to Service Translation [LoST] protocol [RFC5222] to validate its civic location records. Records in a LIS (3) Typo in the third paragraph of Section 1, an omitted apostrophe: Old: which of the clients records may change as a result of the planned New: which of the client's records may change as a result of the planned (4) Please clarify what "IDs are ordered." means in the third paragraph of Section 1. E.g., are they integer values that increases with each subsequent ChangeSet, or an opaque string or value that is meaningful only to the server that issued it, but that is different for each subsequent ChangeSet, or something else? May also want to add text to clarify if two LoST servers that have the same data also have the same change IDs, or if each server can have its own ID even for the exact same change list. (5) Also in the third paragraph of Section 1, please consider changing both instances of "the" to "a" in the text "allows the client to poll the server". (6) In the fifth paragraph of Section 1, there's an outdated reference to the notification URI. I suggest deleting it or making the text a comment in the XML, pending final resolution of the issue. Old: The notification URI allows a LIS to be alerted to planned changes, while the "as of" New: The "as of" (7) Continuing from (6), in the 7th paragraph of Section 1: Old: In situations where it is not practical or advisable for the LIS to maintain a stable URI for each of its records, periodic revalidation can still be used to maintain the data in the LIS. New: In addition to the poll interface, periodic revalidation can still be used to maintain the data in the LIS. (8) While there's a typo in the 7th paragraph of Section 1, a missing comma after "" in the text "the which provides", it might be more clear to replace "which" with "to" (and drop the "s" from "provides"), as you prefer: Old: to the which provides advice from the server to New: to the , which provides advice from the server to Or: to the to provide advice from the server to (9) In the first paragraph of Section 3, consider editorial tweaks to the description of GetChangeSet: Old: the ChangeSet object which contains the New: the corresponding ChangeSet object. A ChangeSet object contains an (10) Continuing (9), to make it more clear that what's returned is an array of arrays: Old: A partial location is New: Each partial location is (11) Typo in the middle of the first paragraph of Section 3: "clients" needs an apostrophe. (12) Another typo in the first paragraph of Section 3, delete "a" before the address element list: Old: have a Country New: have Country (13) Typo in the second paragraph of Section 3: "is string" should be "is a string". (14) Suggested rewording in the second paragraph of Section 3: Old: A new client does not know any ids, or a client may lose the id that it had. The client would poll omitting the changeSetId in the poll query, and it response, the server returns all the ChangeSets it knows about New: Since a new client does not have a previous changeSetId, and to accommodate a client that lost its previous changeSetId, the changeSetId is optional in the PlannedChangePoll interface. When used without a changeSetId, the server returns a list containing each changeSetId for which it has information. (15) Typo in the second paragraph of Section 3: "whoose" should be "whose". (16) Another in the second paragraph of Section 3: "recieve" should be "receive". (17) Consider adding text to or following the second paragraph of Section 3 to address the situation where a "tardy" client has missed change sets that the server has aged out. One option would be to require the server to keep a tombstone containing the newest change set ID that it has deleted. If a client uses PlannedChangePoll with a changeSetId that's equal to or older than the tombstone ID, the server returns a warning (e.g., "agedOutChangeSetId") to alert the client that it has missed change sets and should revalidate its entire database. The server should probably include this warning if the client omits the changeSetId and the server has aged out one or more change sets. To my reading, the way a client recovers or bootstraps is that it uses the PlannedChangePoll to obtain the latest changeSetId the server has and then revalidates its entire database. From then on, using PlannedChangePoll with the latest changeSetId it has will keep the client updated unless it gets so tardy that it receives the "agedOutChangeSetId" warning. (It needs to obtain the latest changeSetId before it revalidates its database since change sets could be added during the revalidation.) (18) In Section 3, there's text: Versions are described as a major version, the period "." and a minor version, where major and minor versions are integers. When I read this, I thought this meant that the version interface returns the two integers as a single string (e.g., "3.2"), but in the schema I see the interface returns them as integers. If I understand the intent of the text here (and I could easily be wrong), consider rewording as: Versions are described in this text as a major version, a period ("."), and a minor version, where the major and minor versions are integers. The versions interface returns the major and minor components of each version as two discrete integers in a versions object. The interface should probably also allow a server ID string to be returned, strictly for logging/debugging. The text in Section 3 should then mention this. (19) Section 3: the description of the version mechanism doesn't explain how a client uses a specific version. I see in Section 8 that the version is part of the path; the text should say this and also have some mechanism to guarantee interoperability, such as requiring clients and servers that implement the extension to always support version 1. (20) In Section 4 ( element), are there any restrictions on the 'asOf' time and date? Can it be in the past (e.g., to check if a location was valid on the date of some past provisioning) or years into the future? Should there be a warning or error if the 'asOf' date is out of whatever range is acceptable? (21) Also in Section 4, should there be a warning if the LoST server doesn't have information specific to the 'asOf' time and date, and is instead validating as if 'asOf' wasn't specified? (E.g., the 'asOf' date is before the next planned change, or is far past the last planned change.) (22) Also in Section 4, the text should say that 'asOf' is mandatory (the schema in Section 7 makes it mandatory, but this should be stated in the text). (23) Typo in Section 4: capitalize "Element" in the section name. (24) Typo in Section 5, first paragraph: delete semicolon after 'ttl' ("for the 'ttl';"). (25) Section 5, second paragraph, I suspect the second use of "server" is an error and should be "client" in the text: Too short, and load on the server may overwhelm it. Too long and invalid data may persist in the server for (26) Also in Section 5, second paragraph, last sentence: same issue as (6) et al, reference to notification mechanism that should be deleted or commented-out in the XML pending acceptance of this mechanism. (27) Section 5, third paragraph, same issue as (6) et al, I suggest deleting or commenting out the comma through the end of the sentence in the text: , especially if the URI mechanism is widely deployed at both the server and the clients. (28) Section 5, third paragraph, in the last line, I suggest changing "would be" to "might be". (29) Section 6, first paragraph, typo "exected" should be "expected". (30) Section 7, typo in first line of first paragraph: suggest changing "prior section schema" to either "prior section's schema" (with a possessive) or "schema in the prior section" (personally, I think the latter reads better, but either is fine). (31) Section 7, at the end, same issue as (6) et al, I suggest deleting or commenting out in the XML the text: (32) Section 8, '/PlannedChangePoll:', the summary "Get a list of planned changeSetIds" could be read as "Get a list of changeSetIds for future changes" when I think it is "Get a list of existent changeSetIds, possibly with older ones omitted due to having been aged out". I think this text should be clarified. (33) Same as above, the '200' OK description of "description: Planned Changes" should be clarified, perhaps something such as "description: existing changeSetIds". (34) Same as above, should "operationId: getPlannedChangeIds" be "operationId: getChangeIds" or some such? (35) Similar to above, should "PlannedChangeIdList" be "ChangeIdList"? (36) More fundamentally, are change sets restricted to changes that have not yet occurred? The names as noted above suggest so, as once the changes occur they aren't "planned," whereas I think of them as set of changes that either have already occurred or are still planned, so a "tardy client" can catch up. (37) Similarly, the description for "changeSetEffective" reads "date and time change will come into effect", implying only future changes. I'd suggest "effective date and time of the change". (38) In Section 9, same as (6) et al, there is an outdated mention of the notifications URI; I suggest deleting (or commenting-out) everything in the first paragraph after the first sentence, and the entire second and third paragraphs. You might then want to add some text about the polling interface, if you think anything about it merits mention. (39) In Sections 10.1 and 10.2, just to make things easier and more error-resistant, you might want to add a comment at the end of each section that says 'IANA: Please replace "????" above with the RFC number of THIS DOCUMENT', because "THIS DOCUMENT" is commonly used as the key so might be searched for. --Randall From nobody Fri Dec 10 15:45:59 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACEE53A0990 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 15:45:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 DVZTQUq2mBQ1 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 15:45:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from turing.pensive.org (turing.pensive.org [99.111.97.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 626C43A0989 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 15:45:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from [99.111.97.136] (99.111.97.161) by turing.pensive.org with ESMTP (EIMS X 3.3.9); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 15:46:21 -0800 From: "Randall Gellens" To: ECRIT Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 15:45:51 -0800 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673) Message-ID: <44A66869-E530-4AC5-A6AD-F2156BE76AF0@randy.pensive.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; markup=markdown Archived-At: Subject: [Ecrit] Please answer: What to do with the planned-changes draft X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 23:45:57 -0000 WG Members, In order to resolve the key open issue and move forward with the planned-changes draft, the chairs and author need to understand how much consensus we have. I've created a Doodle poll to help do this. Please pick one of the first three choices, and, if applicable, either of the 3d and 4th choices and add a comment. The first three choices are: -Either mechanism (polling or notification) is OK with me. -I prefer the notification mechanism. -I prefer the polling mechanism. If you prefer polling or notification but can live with the other, please vote "Yes" for the one you prefer and vote "Yes, if need be" (by double-clicking) on the other. If you have a technical objection to either mechanism, please vote for the 3d or 4th choice and enter a comment. The 3d and 4th choices are: -I have a technical objection to the polling mechanism. -I have a technical objection to the notification mechanism. The poll URL: https://doodle.com/poll/3krg2xh2yk3iww8r?utm_source=poll&utm_medium=link As a reminder, it's perfectly fine to vote for the first choice (no preference) and leave it at that. --Randall From nobody Tue Dec 14 09:22:31 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2BCC3A08F7 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:22:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 mYXRyXFfTTof for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:22:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from turing.pensive.org (turing.pensive.org [99.111.97.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35B8C3A086F for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:22:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from [99.111.97.136] (99.111.97.161) by turing.pensive.org with ESMTP (EIMS X 3.3.9); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:22:57 -0800 From: "Randall Gellens" To: ECRIT Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:22:23 -0800 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the planned-changes draft X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 17:22:29 -0000 WG Members, In order to resolve the key open issue and move forward with the planned-changes draft, the chairs and author need to understand how much consensus we have. I've created a Doodle poll to help do this. Please pick one of the first three choices, and, if applicable, either of the 3d and 4th choices and add a comment. The first three choices are: -Either mechanism (polling or notification) is OK with me. -I prefer the notification mechanism. -I prefer the polling mechanism. If you prefer polling or notification but can live with the other, please vote "Yes" for the one you prefer and vote "Yes, if need be" (by double-clicking) on the other. If you have a technical objection to either mechanism, please vote for the 3d or 4th choice and enter a comment. The 3d and 4th choices are: -I have a technical objection to the polling mechanism. -I have a technical objection to the notification mechanism. The poll URL: https://doodle.com/poll/3krg2xh2yk3iww8r?utm_source=poll&utm_medium=link As a reminder, it's perfectly fine to vote for the first choice (no preference) and leave it at that. --Randall From nobody Tue Dec 14 11:05:40 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E387A3A040B for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 11:05:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bell.ca 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 eraNkZXeQDSN for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 11:05:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from ESA1-Dor.bell.ca (esa1-dor.bell.ca [204.101.223.58]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E4083A040C for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 11:05:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bell.ca; i=@bell.ca; q=dns/txt; s=ESAcorp; t=1639508734; x=1671044734; h=from:to:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject; bh=svuSemryC7bl9kV26bY9j6jVYFulD0BZj8HkI2ww6xM=; b=Nt+qpFw1+gYyc5pzZAvUYnt+VjYPuVIh79txOrJAmvDvqzKVrRI8pQJ1 ToryJgej42hyX/EDFiLQbLIUOXQzblN0Mtd7a+bmCdVS/vjfcdgjIxIzi RfM+wtuyG2SkeSrYZiQRVCwz3oW1lFE8dk0n68r32q0slOPm6DlwS5v9I b+hvy1iaC+jU+GwzSKIfPZAZ4ySoG0eFwJG7qwy6LMEb/D9Af890TAdYh SN2DxuVWxRPtChL1Nd9Q+PK6wOhUj9Ql+Wxa2bkAEjvYiwYEAo84qcvQz Ne1KJbapnB8kQjNsr55sHHX47beeeweu+tOk7YzRgig1QCLRy/uW9HbDG w==; IronPort-SDR: gn9XMEjXC8bX5zeQtfwz/xUk1OK84spZ8et2tHJa4V21kbz4Qw+15QbSff90Aj5k4DwWGfapcF /ZpFRgYfSq2A== Received: from dc5cmy-d00.bellca.int.bell.ca (HELO DG4MBX02-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca) ([198.235.121.229]) by esa01corp-dor.bell.corp.bce.ca with ESMTP; 14 Dec 2021 14:05:32 -0500 Received: from DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.18.46) by DG4MBX02-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.18.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.18; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:05:32 -0500 Received: from DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.18.46) by DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.18.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2242.10; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:05:31 -0500 Received: from DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca ([fe80::e418:76b1:f7e1:1d55]) by DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca ([fe80::e418:76b1:f7e1:1d55%4]) with mapi id 15.01.2242.010; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:05:31 -0500 From: "Caron, Guy" To: Randall Gellens , ECRIT Thread-Topic: [EXT][Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the planned-changes draft Thread-Index: AQHX8Q8wd+y0xzvmtkClF5s9dPznAawySm7Q Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 19:05:31 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: fr-CA, en-US Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.28.239.66] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the planned-changes draft X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 19:05:39 -0000 Corporate Security policy blocks access to Doodle. In any event, I'm totally against this drastic change of operation for this= draft. I will remind the WG that lost-planned-changes as a *notification mechanism= * has been around in IETF ECRIT since November 2013, was turned into a WG i= tem in July 2016 and went through at least two WGLCs. That means that lost-= planned-changes as a *notification mechanism* has been out there undisputed= for 8 years. More importantly, it has been *normatively referenced as a mandatory requir= ement* in at least one published standard since 2016. Such a change on the = mechanism at this time will likely make some implementations stranded and n= o longer standards-compliant. Also, the late coming proposal to change from a push notification to a pull= does not resolve anything; the notification mechanism as in -04 works with= a few tweaks discussed on the list. Finally, the original request that initiate this draft in the first place w= as to move away from blind polling of a LoST Server for validation requests= . The new proposal moves us right back where we started. A simple matter of taste cannot propel such a drastic change of direction. = Only significant flaws in the existing mechanism could drive that, and I ha= ven't seen any of that on the list. It is news to me that the IETF uses formal polls to achieve consensus. I'm = not sure this fits well with the Tao. Guy -----Message d'origine----- De=A0: Ecrit De la part de Randall Gellens Envoy=E9=A0: 14 d=E9cembre 2021 12:22 =C0=A0: ECRIT Objet=A0: [EXT][Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the planned-c= hanges draft WG Members, In order to resolve the key open issue and move forward with the planned-ch= anges draft, the chairs and author need to understand how much consensus we= have. I've created a Doodle poll to help do this. Please pick one of the f= irst three choices, and, if applicable, either of the 3d and 4th choices an= d add a comment. The first three choices are: -Either mechanism (polling or notification) is OK with me. -I prefer the notification mechanism. -I prefer the polling mechanism. If you prefer polling or notification but can live with the other, please v= ote "Yes" for the one you prefer and vote "Yes, if need be" (by double-clicking) on the other. If you have a technical objection to either mechanism, please vote for the = 3d or 4th choice and enter a comment. The 3d and 4th choices are: -I have a technical objection to the polling mechanism. -I have a technical objection to the notification mechanism. The poll URL: https://doodle.com/poll/3krg2xh2yk3iww8r?utm_source=3Dpoll&utm_medium=3Dlin= k As a reminder, it's perfectly fine to vote for the first choice (no preference) and leave it at that. --Randall _______________________________________________ Ecrit mailing list Ecrit@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- External Email: Please use caution when opening links and attachments / Cou= rriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et documents joints From nobody Tue Dec 14 14:39:05 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AA473A0AC4 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:39:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 qabuHY53mcs5 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:38:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from turing.pensive.org (turing.pensive.org [99.111.97.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC6043A0AC8 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:38:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from [99.111.97.136] (99.111.97.161) by turing.pensive.org with ESMTP (EIMS X 3.3.9); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:39:31 -0800 From: "Randall Gellens" To: "Caron, Guy" Cc: ECRIT Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:38:57 -0800 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673) Message-ID: <5951FB8F-1ABA-4EBE-8AC6-2617E5DEC237@randy.pensive.org> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the planned-changes draft X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 22:39:03 -0000 On 14 Dec 2021, at 11:05, Caron, Guy wrote: > Corporate Security policy blocks access to Doodle. I'll be happy to fill in your entry for you. > In any event, I'm totally against this drastic change of operation for > this draft. > > I will remind the WG that lost-planned-changes as a *notification > mechanism* has been around in IETF ECRIT since November 2013, was > turned into a WG item in July 2016 and went through at least two > WGLCs. That means that lost-planned-changes as a *notification > mechanism* has been out there undisputed for 8 years. > > More importantly, it has been *normatively referenced as a mandatory > requirement* in at least one published standard since 2016. Such a > change on the mechanism at this time will likely make some > implementations stranded and no longer standards-compliant. > > Also, the late coming proposal to change from a push notification to a > pull does not resolve anything; the notification mechanism as in -04 > works with a few tweaks discussed on the list. > > Finally, the original request that initiate this draft in the first > place was to move away from blind polling of a LoST Server for > validation requests. The new proposal moves us right back where we > started. > > A simple matter of taste cannot propel such a drastic change of > direction. Only significant flaws in the existing mechanism could > drive that, and I haven't seen any of that on the list. Thanks for sharing your views, I appreciate it. It's clear that you are prefer the notification mechanism. For the other part of the question, do you have a technical objection to the polling mechanism, and what could be done to alleviate it? > It is news to me that the IETF uses formal polls to achieve consensus. > I'm not sure this fits well with the Tao. This is clearly not a formal poll nor will or can it be used to declare consensus. It's an informal mechanism to gauge WG sentiment, which is a precursor to determining consensus. I tried to make that clear in my email, and am sorry I wasn't successful. > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Ecrit De la part de Randall Gellens > Envoyé : 14 décembre 2021 12:22 > À : ECRIT > Objet : [EXT][Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the > planned-changes draft > > WG Members, > > In order to resolve the key open issue and move forward with the > planned-changes draft, the chairs and author need to understand how > much consensus we have. I've created a Doodle poll to help do this. > Please pick one of the first three choices, and, if applicable, either > of the 3d and 4th choices and add a comment. > > The first three choices are: > > -Either mechanism (polling or notification) is OK with me. > -I prefer the notification mechanism. > -I prefer the polling mechanism. > > If you prefer polling or notification but can live with the other, > please vote "Yes" for the one you prefer and vote "Yes, if need be" > (by > double-clicking) on the other. > > If you have a technical objection to either mechanism, please vote for > the 3d or 4th choice and enter a comment. > > The 3d and 4th choices are: > > -I have a technical objection to the polling mechanism. > -I have a technical objection to the notification mechanism. > > The poll URL: > > https://doodle.com/poll/3krg2xh2yk3iww8r?utm_source=poll&utm_medium=link > > As a reminder, it's perfectly fine to vote for the first choice (no > preference) and leave it at that. > > --Randall > > _______________________________________________ > Ecrit mailing list > Ecrit@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > External Email: Please use caution when opening links and attachments > / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et documents joints From nobody Wed Dec 15 07:15:10 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F7593A08D2 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:15:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bell.ca 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 U24YG2b9YPvd for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:15:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from ESA1-Dor.bell.ca (esa1-dor.bell.ca [204.101.223.58]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 165D23A08ED for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:14:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bell.ca; i=@bell.ca; q=dns/txt; s=ESAcorp; t=1639581300; x=1671117300; h=from:to:cc:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject; bh=wxsJ3y+5SHMJSuHYF32kzdBew7RCBLMRLdcTaD4CLnE=; b=B0Y9R3NDv7KsT/ct+giH3vI67JpIiEaIkEKYafBWZ3mLfigDei7yo/f5 M5denXCjeP/gq/XaqSwQ0c39B65cPTSkI2tvEmjzw8vSIYOWEdnQ9EHG8 pfTMWj1M4Z4T02FOQGRZmC39n8CgRtgS0FlJuZdFH5bQood5xws3LMsNe tls2RuvVN2FrXQjIL/bilx4zloxq1C7kY6jIthYH/BmGbcmvMjkRGFSdt /1qbT2+FX+DsN+Jyqp4Fx02dre3L2TK/XuDl+J41kN737uQk0qN9JAgDN fFudWJCVmJNZartooMDZIUzIR8yDX25o8hCoLdLlptUp6lG4jKKCk/jh2 w==; IronPort-SDR: 2XSnkIylaIBXQR32IkgfVUB6yJnwKyWvXxMqY06CfS2O8UWwwfI4wFDY5mhkZolACgQGYjn3F7 c5aXi6ZycZ+g== Received: from dc5cmy-d00.bellca.int.bell.ca (HELO DG7MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca) ([198.235.121.229]) by esa01corp-dor.bell.corp.bce.ca with ESMTP; 15 Dec 2021 10:14:58 -0500 Received: from DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.18.46) by DG7MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.18.40) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.18; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 10:14:57 -0500 Received: from DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.18.46) by DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.18.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2242.10; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 10:14:57 -0500 Received: from DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca ([fe80::e418:76b1:f7e1:1d55]) by DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca ([fe80::e418:76b1:f7e1:1d55%4]) with mapi id 15.01.2242.010; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 10:14:57 -0500 From: "Caron, Guy" To: Randall Gellens CC: ECRIT Thread-Topic: [EXT]Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the planned-changes draft Thread-Index: AQHX8TtjS7WYuiTjekSpkNCTsg1wFawzqZvg Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 15:14:57 +0000 Message-ID: <99e181c3518f408cadf2cd421936a528@bell.ca> References: <5951FB8F-1ABA-4EBE-8AC6-2617E5DEC237@randy.pensive.org> In-Reply-To: <5951FB8F-1ABA-4EBE-8AC6-2617E5DEC237@randy.pensive.org> Accept-Language: fr-CA, en-US Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.28.239.66] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the planned-changes draft X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 15:15:07 -0000 ImRvIHlvdSBoYXZlIGEgdGVjaG5pY2FsIG9iamVjdGlvbiB0byB0aGUgcG9sbGluZyBtZWNoYW5p c20sIGFuZCB3aGF0IGNvdWxkIGJlIGRvbmUgdG8gYWxsZXZpYXRlIGl0PyINCg0KSW4gcHJvY2Vk dXJhbCBmYWlybmVzcywgSSB3b3VsZCB0aGluayB0aGUgb251cyBpcyBvbiB0aGUgcHJvcG9uZW50 IG9mIHRoZSBsYXRlIGNvbWluZyBwb2xsaW5nIHByb3Bvc2FsIHRvIHJhaXNlIHRlY2huaWNhbCBv YmplY3Rpb25zIHRvIHRoZSBub3RpZmljYXRpb24gbWVjaGFuaXNtIHRoYXQgbWFrZXMgaXQgaW5v cGVyYWJsZS4NCg0KSSBtYWRlIG15IG9iamVjdGlvbnMgY2xlYXIgaW4gbXkgcmVzcG9uc2UuDQoN Ckd1eQ0KDQotLS0tLU1lc3NhZ2UgZCdvcmlnaW5lLS0tLS0NCkRlwqA6IFJhbmRhbGwgR2VsbGVu cyA8cmcraWV0ZkByYW5keS5wZW5zaXZlLm9yZz4gDQpFbnZvecOpwqA6IDE0IGTDqWNlbWJyZSAy MDIxIDE3OjM5DQrDgMKgOiBDYXJvbiwgR3V5IDxnLmNhcm9uQGJlbGwuY2E+DQpDY8KgOiBFQ1JJ VCA8ZWNyaXRAaWV0Zi5vcmc+DQpPYmpldMKgOiBbRVhUXVJlOiBbRWNyaXRdIFRJTUVMWTogUGxl YXNlIGFuc3dlcjogV2hhdCB0byBkbyB3aXRoIHRoZSBwbGFubmVkLWNoYW5nZXMgZHJhZnQNCg0K T24gMTQgRGVjIDIwMjEsIGF0IDExOjA1LCBDYXJvbiwgR3V5IHdyb3RlOg0KDQo+IENvcnBvcmF0 ZSBTZWN1cml0eSBwb2xpY3kgYmxvY2tzIGFjY2VzcyB0byBEb29kbGUuDQoNCkknbGwgYmUgaGFw cHkgdG8gZmlsbCBpbiB5b3VyIGVudHJ5IGZvciB5b3UuDQoNCg0KPiBJbiBhbnkgZXZlbnQsIEkn bSB0b3RhbGx5IGFnYWluc3QgdGhpcyBkcmFzdGljIGNoYW5nZSBvZiBvcGVyYXRpb24gZm9yIA0K PiB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0Lg0KPg0KPiBJIHdpbGwgcmVtaW5kIHRoZSBXRyB0aGF0IGxvc3QtcGxhbm5l ZC1jaGFuZ2VzIGFzIGEgKm5vdGlmaWNhdGlvbg0KPiBtZWNoYW5pc20qIGhhcyBiZWVuIGFyb3Vu ZCBpbiBJRVRGIEVDUklUIHNpbmNlIE5vdmVtYmVyIDIwMTMsIHdhcyANCj4gdHVybmVkIGludG8g YSBXRyBpdGVtIGluIEp1bHkgMjAxNiBhbmQgd2VudCB0aHJvdWdoIGF0IGxlYXN0IHR3byANCj4g V0dMQ3MuIFRoYXQgbWVhbnMgdGhhdCBsb3N0LXBsYW5uZWQtY2hhbmdlcyBhcyBhICpub3RpZmlj YXRpb24NCj4gbWVjaGFuaXNtKiBoYXMgYmVlbiBvdXQgdGhlcmUgdW5kaXNwdXRlZCBmb3IgOCB5 ZWFycy4NCj4NCj4gTW9yZSBpbXBvcnRhbnRseSwgaXQgaGFzIGJlZW4gKm5vcm1hdGl2ZWx5IHJl ZmVyZW5jZWQgYXMgYSBtYW5kYXRvcnkNCj4gcmVxdWlyZW1lbnQqIGluIGF0IGxlYXN0IG9uZSBw dWJsaXNoZWQgc3RhbmRhcmQgc2luY2UgMjAxNi4gU3VjaCBhIA0KPiBjaGFuZ2Ugb24gdGhlIG1l Y2hhbmlzbSBhdCB0aGlzIHRpbWUgd2lsbCBsaWtlbHkgbWFrZSBzb21lIA0KPiBpbXBsZW1lbnRh dGlvbnMgc3RyYW5kZWQgYW5kIG5vIGxvbmdlciBzdGFuZGFyZHMtY29tcGxpYW50Lg0KPg0KPiBB bHNvLCB0aGUgbGF0ZSBjb21pbmcgcHJvcG9zYWwgdG8gY2hhbmdlIGZyb20gYSBwdXNoIG5vdGlm aWNhdGlvbiB0byBhIA0KPiBwdWxsIGRvZXMgbm90IHJlc29sdmUgYW55dGhpbmc7IHRoZSBub3Rp ZmljYXRpb24gbWVjaGFuaXNtIGFzIGluIC0wNCANCj4gd29ya3Mgd2l0aCBhIGZldyB0d2Vha3Mg ZGlzY3Vzc2VkIG9uIHRoZSBsaXN0Lg0KPg0KPiBGaW5hbGx5LCB0aGUgb3JpZ2luYWwgcmVxdWVz dCB0aGF0IGluaXRpYXRlIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQgaW4gdGhlIGZpcnN0IA0KPiBwbGFjZSB3YXMgdG8g bW92ZSBhd2F5IGZyb20gYmxpbmQgcG9sbGluZyBvZiBhIExvU1QgU2VydmVyIGZvciANCj4gdmFs aWRhdGlvbiByZXF1ZXN0cy4gVGhlIG5ldyBwcm9wb3NhbCBtb3ZlcyB1cyByaWdodCBiYWNrIHdo ZXJlIHdlIA0KPiBzdGFydGVkLg0KPg0KPiBBIHNpbXBsZSBtYXR0ZXIgb2YgdGFzdGUgY2Fubm90 IHByb3BlbCBzdWNoIGEgZHJhc3RpYyBjaGFuZ2Ugb2YgDQo+IGRpcmVjdGlvbi4gT25seSBzaWdu aWZpY2FudCBmbGF3cyBpbiB0aGUgZXhpc3RpbmcgbWVjaGFuaXNtIGNvdWxkIA0KPiBkcml2ZSB0 aGF0LCBhbmQgSSBoYXZlbid0IHNlZW4gYW55IG9mIHRoYXQgb24gdGhlIGxpc3QuDQoNClRoYW5r cyBmb3Igc2hhcmluZyB5b3VyIHZpZXdzLCBJIGFwcHJlY2lhdGUgaXQuIEl0J3MgY2xlYXIgdGhh dCB5b3UgYXJlIHByZWZlciB0aGUgbm90aWZpY2F0aW9uIG1lY2hhbmlzbS4gRm9yIHRoZSBvdGhl ciBwYXJ0IG9mIHRoZSBxdWVzdGlvbiwgZG8geW91IGhhdmUgYSB0ZWNobmljYWwgb2JqZWN0aW9u IHRvIHRoZSBwb2xsaW5nIG1lY2hhbmlzbSwgYW5kIHdoYXQgY291bGQgYmUgZG9uZSB0byBhbGxl dmlhdGUgaXQ/DQoNCg0KPiBJdCBpcyBuZXdzIHRvIG1lIHRoYXQgdGhlIElFVEYgdXNlcyBmb3Jt YWwgcG9sbHMgdG8gYWNoaWV2ZSBjb25zZW5zdXMuIA0KPiBJJ20gbm90IHN1cmUgdGhpcyBmaXRz IHdlbGwgd2l0aCB0aGUgVGFvLg0KDQpUaGlzIGlzIGNsZWFybHkgbm90IGEgZm9ybWFsIHBvbGwg bm9yIHdpbGwgb3IgY2FuIGl0IGJlIHVzZWQgdG8gZGVjbGFyZSBjb25zZW5zdXMuIEl0J3MgYW4g aW5mb3JtYWwgbWVjaGFuaXNtIHRvIGdhdWdlIFdHIHNlbnRpbWVudCwgd2hpY2ggaXMgYSBwcmVj dXJzb3IgdG8gZGV0ZXJtaW5pbmcgY29uc2Vuc3VzLiBJIHRyaWVkIHRvIG1ha2UgdGhhdCBjbGVh ciBpbiBteSBlbWFpbCwgYW5kIGFtIHNvcnJ5IEkgd2Fzbid0IHN1Y2Nlc3NmdWwuDQoNCg0KDQo+ IC0tLS0tTWVzc2FnZSBkJ29yaWdpbmUtLS0tLQ0KPiBEZcKgOiBFY3JpdCA8ZWNyaXQtYm91bmNl c0BpZXRmLm9yZz4gRGUgbGEgcGFydCBkZSBSYW5kYWxsIEdlbGxlbnMgDQo+IEVudm95w6nCoDog MTQgZMOpY2VtYnJlIDIwMjEgMTI6MjIgw4DCoDogRUNSSVQgPGVjcml0QGlldGYub3JnPiBPYmpl dMKgOiANCj4gW0VYVF1bRWNyaXRdIFRJTUVMWTogUGxlYXNlIGFuc3dlcjogV2hhdCB0byBkbyB3 aXRoIHRoZSANCj4gcGxhbm5lZC1jaGFuZ2VzIGRyYWZ0DQo+DQo+IFdHIE1lbWJlcnMsDQo+DQo+ IEluIG9yZGVyIHRvIHJlc29sdmUgdGhlIGtleSBvcGVuIGlzc3VlIGFuZCBtb3ZlIGZvcndhcmQg d2l0aCB0aGUgDQo+IHBsYW5uZWQtY2hhbmdlcyBkcmFmdCwgdGhlIGNoYWlycyBhbmQgYXV0aG9y IG5lZWQgdG8gdW5kZXJzdGFuZCBob3cgDQo+IG11Y2ggY29uc2Vuc3VzIHdlIGhhdmUuIEkndmUg Y3JlYXRlZCBhIERvb2RsZSBwb2xsIHRvIGhlbHAgZG8gdGhpcy4NCj4gUGxlYXNlIHBpY2sgb25l IG9mIHRoZSBmaXJzdCB0aHJlZSBjaG9pY2VzLCBhbmQsIGlmIGFwcGxpY2FibGUsIGVpdGhlciAN Cj4gb2YgdGhlIDNkIGFuZCA0dGggY2hvaWNlcyBhbmQgYWRkIGEgY29tbWVudC4NCj4NCj4gVGhl IGZpcnN0IHRocmVlIGNob2ljZXMgYXJlOg0KPg0KPiAtRWl0aGVyIG1lY2hhbmlzbSAocG9sbGlu ZyBvciBub3RpZmljYXRpb24pIGlzIE9LIHdpdGggbWUuDQo+IC1JIHByZWZlciB0aGUgbm90aWZp Y2F0aW9uIG1lY2hhbmlzbS4NCj4gLUkgcHJlZmVyIHRoZSBwb2xsaW5nIG1lY2hhbmlzbS4NCj4N Cj4gSWYgeW91IHByZWZlciBwb2xsaW5nIG9yIG5vdGlmaWNhdGlvbiBidXQgY2FuIGxpdmUgd2l0 aCB0aGUgb3RoZXIsIA0KPiBwbGVhc2Ugdm90ZSAiWWVzIiBmb3IgdGhlIG9uZSB5b3UgcHJlZmVy IGFuZCB2b3RlICJZZXMsIGlmIG5lZWQgYmUiDQo+IChieQ0KPiBkb3VibGUtY2xpY2tpbmcpIG9u IHRoZSBvdGhlci4NCj4NCj4gSWYgeW91IGhhdmUgYSB0ZWNobmljYWwgb2JqZWN0aW9uIHRvIGVp dGhlciBtZWNoYW5pc20sIHBsZWFzZSB2b3RlIGZvciANCj4gdGhlIDNkIG9yIDR0aCBjaG9pY2Ug YW5kIGVudGVyIGEgY29tbWVudC4NCj4NCj4gVGhlIDNkIGFuZCA0dGggY2hvaWNlcyBhcmU6DQo+ DQo+IC1JIGhhdmUgYSB0ZWNobmljYWwgb2JqZWN0aW9uIHRvIHRoZSBwb2xsaW5nIG1lY2hhbmlz bS4NCj4gLUkgaGF2ZSBhIHRlY2huaWNhbCBvYmplY3Rpb24gdG8gdGhlIG5vdGlmaWNhdGlvbiBt ZWNoYW5pc20uDQo+DQo+IFRoZSBwb2xsIFVSTDoNCj4NCj4gaHR0cHM6Ly9kb29kbGUuY29tL3Bv bGwvM2tyZzJ4aDJ5azNpd3c4cj91dG1fc291cmNlPXBvbGwmdXRtX21lZGl1bT1saQ0KPiBuaw0K Pg0KPiBBcyBhIHJlbWluZGVyLCBpdCdzIHBlcmZlY3RseSBmaW5lIHRvIHZvdGUgZm9yIHRoZSBm aXJzdCBjaG9pY2UgKG5vDQo+IHByZWZlcmVuY2UpIGFuZCBsZWF2ZSBpdCBhdCB0aGF0Lg0KPg0K PiAtLVJhbmRhbGwNCj4NCj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX18NCj4gRWNyaXQgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+IEVjcml0QGlldGYub3JnDQo+IGh0dHBz Oi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vZWNyaXQNCj4gLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0K PiAtLS0tLS0tLSBFeHRlcm5hbCBFbWFpbDogUGxlYXNlIHVzZSBjYXV0aW9uIHdoZW4gb3Blbmlu ZyBsaW5rcyBhbmQgDQo+IGF0dGFjaG1lbnRzIC8gQ291cnJpZWwgZXh0ZXJuZTogU295ZXogcHJ1 ZGVudCBhdmVjIGxlcyBsaWVucyBldCANCj4gZG9jdW1lbnRzIGpvaW50cw0KLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tDQpFeHRlcm5hbCBFbWFpbDogUGxlYXNlIHVzZSBjYXV0aW9uIHdoZW4gb3Blbmlu ZyBsaW5rcyBhbmQgYXR0YWNobWVudHMgLyBDb3VycmllbCBleHRlcm5lOiBTb3lleiBwcnVkZW50 IGF2ZWMgbGVzIGxpZW5zIGV0IGRvY3VtZW50cyBqb2ludHMNCg== From nobody Wed Dec 15 07:24:29 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3D8D3A0902 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:24:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 0MUDQa9fVQ47 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:24:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from turing.pensive.org (turing.pensive.org [99.111.97.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 429593A0933 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:24:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from [99.111.97.136] (99.111.97.161) by turing.pensive.org with ESMTP (EIMS X 3.3.9); Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:24:42 -0800 From: "Randall Gellens" To: "Caron, Guy" Cc: ECRIT Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:24:07 -0800 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <99e181c3518f408cadf2cd421936a528@bell.ca> References: <5951FB8F-1ABA-4EBE-8AC6-2617E5DEC237@randy.pensive.org> <99e181c3518f408cadf2cd421936a528@bell.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the planned-changes draft X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 15:24:28 -0000 On 15 Dec 2021, at 7:14, Caron, Guy wrote: > "do you have a technical objection to the polling mechanism, and what > could be done to alleviate it?" > > In procedural fairness, I would think the onus is on the proponent of > the late coming polling proposal to raise technical objections to the > notification mechanism that makes it inoperable. In fairness, the chairs and document author are asking WG members to express a preference for one or the other mechanism, or no preference, and if they have a preference, to also say if they have a technical objection to the other mechanism, and if so, what could be done to alleviate that objection. > > I made my objections clear in my response. I apologize, but I did not see a technical objection in your response. If you have one, please make it clear. Thank you, --Randall > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Randall Gellens > Envoyé : 14 décembre 2021 17:39 > À : Caron, Guy > Cc : ECRIT > Objet : [EXT]Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the > planned-changes draft > > On 14 Dec 2021, at 11:05, Caron, Guy wrote: > >> Corporate Security policy blocks access to Doodle. > > I'll be happy to fill in your entry for you. > > >> In any event, I'm totally against this drastic change of operation >> for >> this draft. >> >> I will remind the WG that lost-planned-changes as a *notification >> mechanism* has been around in IETF ECRIT since November 2013, was >> turned into a WG item in July 2016 and went through at least two >> WGLCs. That means that lost-planned-changes as a *notification >> mechanism* has been out there undisputed for 8 years. >> >> More importantly, it has been *normatively referenced as a mandatory >> requirement* in at least one published standard since 2016. Such a >> change on the mechanism at this time will likely make some >> implementations stranded and no longer standards-compliant. >> >> Also, the late coming proposal to change from a push notification to >> a >> pull does not resolve anything; the notification mechanism as in -04 >> works with a few tweaks discussed on the list. >> >> Finally, the original request that initiate this draft in the first >> place was to move away from blind polling of a LoST Server for >> validation requests. The new proposal moves us right back where we >> started. >> >> A simple matter of taste cannot propel such a drastic change of >> direction. Only significant flaws in the existing mechanism could >> drive that, and I haven't seen any of that on the list. > > Thanks for sharing your views, I appreciate it. It's clear that you > are prefer the notification mechanism. For the other part of the > question, do you have a technical objection to the polling mechanism, > and what could be done to alleviate it? > > >> It is news to me that the IETF uses formal polls to achieve >> consensus. >> I'm not sure this fits well with the Tao. > > This is clearly not a formal poll nor will or can it be used to > declare consensus. It's an informal mechanism to gauge WG sentiment, > which is a precursor to determining consensus. I tried to make that > clear in my email, and am sorry I wasn't successful. > > > >> -----Message d'origine----- >> De : Ecrit De la part de Randall Gellens >> Envoyé : 14 décembre 2021 12:22 À : ECRIT >> Objet : >> [EXT][Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the >> planned-changes draft >> >> WG Members, >> >> In order to resolve the key open issue and move forward with the >> planned-changes draft, the chairs and author need to understand how >> much consensus we have. I've created a Doodle poll to help do this. >> Please pick one of the first three choices, and, if applicable, >> either >> of the 3d and 4th choices and add a comment. >> >> The first three choices are: >> >> -Either mechanism (polling or notification) is OK with me. >> -I prefer the notification mechanism. >> -I prefer the polling mechanism. >> >> If you prefer polling or notification but can live with the other, >> please vote "Yes" for the one you prefer and vote "Yes, if need be" >> (by >> double-clicking) on the other. >> >> If you have a technical objection to either mechanism, please vote >> for >> the 3d or 4th choice and enter a comment. >> >> The 3d and 4th choices are: >> >> -I have a technical objection to the polling mechanism. >> -I have a technical objection to the notification mechanism. >> >> The poll URL: >> >> https://doodle.com/poll/3krg2xh2yk3iww8r?utm_source=poll&utm_medium=li >> nk >> >> As a reminder, it's perfectly fine to vote for the first choice (no >> preference) and leave it at that. >> >> --Randall >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ecrit mailing list >> Ecrit@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -------- External Email: Please use caution when opening links and >> attachments / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et >> documents joints > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > External Email: Please use caution when opening links and attachments > / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et documents joints From nobody Wed Dec 15 07:25:49 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E3E3A0958 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:25:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bell.ca 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 FoxBVBjo0te0 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:25:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from ESA2-Wyn.bell.ca (esa2-wyn.bell.ca [67.69.243.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADD973A092F for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:25:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bell.ca; i=@bell.ca; q=dns/txt; s=ESAcorp; t=1639581925; x=1671117925; h=from:to:cc:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject; bh=EgmU3o1EHZoazJ5f+q+rlfmJ7jEr2MQi7RbdjNXCF88=; b=cLFld3BYgTOuVsr+JKNTvG9DER3ijf5HeYREp/N7r1zYK/z9hgeASu5/ XiuqaqyLJV0JozXbjhFIS2lPa1xGT/uzPqCQ/AmX8f5E4PTi80rGCV75P 1WrDHov6WLEjxmN5ZJIK2D44caXhXpmgXzKxZSAUSkd5TwMWXyB9Uet5e gsKVTntl094tLZ6judXj2NjUPTUEkuRfqdy0NAELTDuka0Gsw6HfZ357F tptTcuOWv5hdq9sFTP86JzTRUds2q8htPi16WAj1MhTCCNzVjXrsFAwsp Sr5qLDgbd57pVhIXk13UeDfh/m7XKSNoip2/T/SYgNEAWQWDqMmGdDtVj w==; IronPort-SDR: 1k5O0+608xibJpOuyCwGBFOZ0cflwzAgHIxv2Xy/FYtcx34MwpRfZgUE4UgTLGye7DyrExh9cF YkFtjCIX/OWg== Received: from dm5cch-d01.bellca.int.bell.ca (HELO DG1MBX02-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca) ([198.235.102.31]) by esa02corp-wyn.bell.corp.bce.ca with ESMTP; 15 Dec 2021 10:25:16 -0500 Received: from DG12MBX03-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.18.48) by DG1MBX02-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.18.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.18; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 10:25:15 -0500 Received: from DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.18.46) by DG12MBX03-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.18.48) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2242.10; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 10:25:15 -0500 Received: from DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca ([fe80::e418:76b1:f7e1:1d55]) by DG12MBX01-WYN.bell.corp.bce.ca ([fe80::e418:76b1:f7e1:1d55%4]) with mapi id 15.01.2242.010; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 10:25:15 -0500 From: "Caron, Guy" To: Randall Gellens CC: ECRIT Thread-Topic: [EXT]Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the planned-changes draft Thread-Index: AQHX8TtjS7WYuiTjekSpkNCTsg1wFawzqZvggABXWYD//6x3EA== Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 15:25:15 +0000 Message-ID: <1c0dd9d5b5a94d3d84b42877ea97f095@bell.ca> References: <5951FB8F-1ABA-4EBE-8AC6-2617E5DEC237@randy.pensive.org> <99e181c3518f408cadf2cd421936a528@bell.ca> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: fr-CA, en-US Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.28.239.66] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the planned-changes draft X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 15:25:48 -0000 SW4gZmFpcm5lc3MsIHRoZSBjaGFpcnMgYW5kIGRvY3VtZW50IGF1dGhvciBhcmUgYXNraW5nIFdH IG1lbWJlcnMgdG8gZXhwcmVzcyBhIHByZWZlcmVuY2UgZm9yIG9uZSBvciB0aGUgb3RoZXIgbWVj aGFuaXNtLCBvciBubyBwcmVmZXJlbmNlLCBhbmQgaWYgdGhleSBoYXZlIGEgcHJlZmVyZW5jZSwg dG8gYWxzbyBzYXkgaWYgdGhleSBoYXZlIGEgdGVjaG5pY2FsIG9iamVjdGlvbiB0byB0aGUgb3Ro ZXIgbWVjaGFuaXNtLCBhbmQgaWYgc28sIHdoYXQgY291bGQgYmUgZG9uZSB0byBhbGxldmlhdGUg dGhhdCBvYmplY3Rpb24uDQoNCkd1eQ0KDQotLS0tLU1lc3NhZ2UgZCdvcmlnaW5lLS0tLS0NCkRl wqA6IFJhbmRhbGwgR2VsbGVucyA8cmcraWV0ZkByYW5keS5wZW5zaXZlLm9yZz4gDQpFbnZvecOp wqA6IDE1IGTDqWNlbWJyZSAyMDIxIDEwOjI0DQrDgMKgOiBDYXJvbiwgR3V5IDxnLmNhcm9uQGJl bGwuY2E+DQpDY8KgOiBFQ1JJVCA8ZWNyaXRAaWV0Zi5vcmc+DQpPYmpldMKgOiBbRVhUXVJlOiBb RWNyaXRdIFRJTUVMWTogUGxlYXNlIGFuc3dlcjogV2hhdCB0byBkbyB3aXRoIHRoZSBwbGFubmVk LWNoYW5nZXMgZHJhZnQNCg0KT24gMTUgRGVjIDIwMjEsIGF0IDc6MTQsIENhcm9uLCBHdXkgd3Jv dGU6DQoNCj4gImRvIHlvdSBoYXZlIGEgdGVjaG5pY2FsIG9iamVjdGlvbiB0byB0aGUgcG9sbGlu ZyBtZWNoYW5pc20sIGFuZCB3aGF0IA0KPiBjb3VsZCBiZSBkb25lIHRvIGFsbGV2aWF0ZSBpdD8i DQo+DQo+IEluIHByb2NlZHVyYWwgZmFpcm5lc3MsIEkgd291bGQgdGhpbmsgdGhlIG9udXMgaXMg b24gdGhlIHByb3BvbmVudCBvZiANCj4gdGhlIGxhdGUgY29taW5nIHBvbGxpbmcgcHJvcG9zYWwg dG8gcmFpc2UgdGVjaG5pY2FsIG9iamVjdGlvbnMgdG8gdGhlIA0KPiBub3RpZmljYXRpb24gbWVj aGFuaXNtIHRoYXQgbWFrZXMgaXQgaW5vcGVyYWJsZS4NCg0KSW4gZmFpcm5lc3MsIHRoZSBjaGFp cnMgYW5kIGRvY3VtZW50IGF1dGhvciBhcmUgYXNraW5nIFdHIG1lbWJlcnMgdG8gZXhwcmVzcyBh IHByZWZlcmVuY2UgZm9yIG9uZSBvciB0aGUgb3RoZXIgbWVjaGFuaXNtLCBvciBubyBwcmVmZXJl bmNlLCBhbmQgaWYgdGhleSBoYXZlIGEgcHJlZmVyZW5jZSwgdG8gYWxzbyBzYXkgaWYgdGhleSBo YXZlIGEgdGVjaG5pY2FsIG9iamVjdGlvbiB0byB0aGUgb3RoZXIgbWVjaGFuaXNtLCBhbmQgaWYg c28sIHdoYXQgY291bGQgYmUgZG9uZSB0byBhbGxldmlhdGUgdGhhdCBvYmplY3Rpb24uDQoNCj4N Cj4gSSBtYWRlIG15IG9iamVjdGlvbnMgY2xlYXIgaW4gbXkgcmVzcG9uc2UuDQoNCkkgYXBvbG9n aXplLCBidXQgSSBkaWQgbm90IHNlZSBhIHRlY2huaWNhbCBvYmplY3Rpb24gaW4geW91ciByZXNw b25zZS4gDQpJZiB5b3UgaGF2ZSBvbmUsIHBsZWFzZSBtYWtlIGl0IGNsZWFyLg0KDQpUaGFuayB5 b3UsDQoNCi0tUmFuZGFsbA0KDQoNCj4gLS0tLS1NZXNzYWdlIGQnb3JpZ2luZS0tLS0tDQo+IERl wqA6IFJhbmRhbGwgR2VsbGVucyA8cmcraWV0ZkByYW5keS5wZW5zaXZlLm9yZz4gRW52b3nDqcKg OiAxNCBkw6ljZW1icmUgDQo+IDIwMjEgMTc6Mzkgw4DCoDogQ2Fyb24sIEd1eSA8Zy5jYXJvbkBi ZWxsLmNhPiBDY8KgOiBFQ1JJVCANCj4gPGVjcml0QGlldGYub3JnPiBPYmpldMKgOiBbRVhUXVJl OiBbRWNyaXRdIFRJTUVMWTogUGxlYXNlIGFuc3dlcjogV2hhdCANCj4gdG8gZG8gd2l0aCB0aGUg cGxhbm5lZC1jaGFuZ2VzIGRyYWZ0DQo+DQo+IE9uIDE0IERlYyAyMDIxLCBhdCAxMTowNSwgQ2Fy b24sIEd1eSB3cm90ZToNCj4NCj4+IENvcnBvcmF0ZSBTZWN1cml0eSBwb2xpY3kgYmxvY2tzIGFj Y2VzcyB0byBEb29kbGUuDQo+DQo+IEknbGwgYmUgaGFwcHkgdG8gZmlsbCBpbiB5b3VyIGVudHJ5 IGZvciB5b3UuDQo+DQo+DQo+PiBJbiBhbnkgZXZlbnQsIEknbSB0b3RhbGx5IGFnYWluc3QgdGhp cyBkcmFzdGljIGNoYW5nZSBvZiBvcGVyYXRpb24gDQo+PiBmb3IgdGhpcyBkcmFmdC4NCj4+DQo+ PiBJIHdpbGwgcmVtaW5kIHRoZSBXRyB0aGF0IGxvc3QtcGxhbm5lZC1jaGFuZ2VzIGFzIGEgKm5v dGlmaWNhdGlvbg0KPj4gbWVjaGFuaXNtKiBoYXMgYmVlbiBhcm91bmQgaW4gSUVURiBFQ1JJVCBz aW5jZSBOb3ZlbWJlciAyMDEzLCB3YXMgDQo+PiB0dXJuZWQgaW50byBhIFdHIGl0ZW0gaW4gSnVs eSAyMDE2IGFuZCB3ZW50IHRocm91Z2ggYXQgbGVhc3QgdHdvIA0KPj4gV0dMQ3MuIFRoYXQgbWVh bnMgdGhhdCBsb3N0LXBsYW5uZWQtY2hhbmdlcyBhcyBhICpub3RpZmljYXRpb24NCj4+IG1lY2hh bmlzbSogaGFzIGJlZW4gb3V0IHRoZXJlIHVuZGlzcHV0ZWQgZm9yIDggeWVhcnMuDQo+Pg0KPj4g TW9yZSBpbXBvcnRhbnRseSwgaXQgaGFzIGJlZW4gKm5vcm1hdGl2ZWx5IHJlZmVyZW5jZWQgYXMg YSBtYW5kYXRvcnkNCj4+IHJlcXVpcmVtZW50KiBpbiBhdCBsZWFzdCBvbmUgcHVibGlzaGVkIHN0 YW5kYXJkIHNpbmNlIDIwMTYuIFN1Y2ggYSANCj4+IGNoYW5nZSBvbiB0aGUgbWVjaGFuaXNtIGF0 IHRoaXMgdGltZSB3aWxsIGxpa2VseSBtYWtlIHNvbWUgDQo+PiBpbXBsZW1lbnRhdGlvbnMgc3Ry YW5kZWQgYW5kIG5vIGxvbmdlciBzdGFuZGFyZHMtY29tcGxpYW50Lg0KPj4NCj4+IEFsc28sIHRo ZSBsYXRlIGNvbWluZyBwcm9wb3NhbCB0byBjaGFuZ2UgZnJvbSBhIHB1c2ggbm90aWZpY2F0aW9u IHRvIA0KPj4gYSBwdWxsIGRvZXMgbm90IHJlc29sdmUgYW55dGhpbmc7IHRoZSBub3RpZmljYXRp b24gbWVjaGFuaXNtIGFzIGluIA0KPj4gLTA0IHdvcmtzIHdpdGggYSBmZXcgdHdlYWtzIGRpc2N1 c3NlZCBvbiB0aGUgbGlzdC4NCj4+DQo+PiBGaW5hbGx5LCB0aGUgb3JpZ2luYWwgcmVxdWVzdCB0 aGF0IGluaXRpYXRlIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQgaW4gdGhlIGZpcnN0IA0KPj4gcGxhY2Ugd2FzIHRvIG1v dmUgYXdheSBmcm9tIGJsaW5kIHBvbGxpbmcgb2YgYSBMb1NUIFNlcnZlciBmb3IgDQo+PiB2YWxp ZGF0aW9uIHJlcXVlc3RzLiBUaGUgbmV3IHByb3Bvc2FsIG1vdmVzIHVzIHJpZ2h0IGJhY2sgd2hl cmUgd2UgDQo+PiBzdGFydGVkLg0KPj4NCj4+IEEgc2ltcGxlIG1hdHRlciBvZiB0YXN0ZSBjYW5u b3QgcHJvcGVsIHN1Y2ggYSBkcmFzdGljIGNoYW5nZSBvZiANCj4+IGRpcmVjdGlvbi4gT25seSBz aWduaWZpY2FudCBmbGF3cyBpbiB0aGUgZXhpc3RpbmcgbWVjaGFuaXNtIGNvdWxkIA0KPj4gZHJp dmUgdGhhdCwgYW5kIEkgaGF2ZW4ndCBzZWVuIGFueSBvZiB0aGF0IG9uIHRoZSBsaXN0Lg0KPg0K PiBUaGFua3MgZm9yIHNoYXJpbmcgeW91ciB2aWV3cywgSSBhcHByZWNpYXRlIGl0LiBJdCdzIGNs ZWFyIHRoYXQgeW91IA0KPiBhcmUgcHJlZmVyIHRoZSBub3RpZmljYXRpb24gbWVjaGFuaXNtLiBG b3IgdGhlIG90aGVyIHBhcnQgb2YgdGhlIA0KPiBxdWVzdGlvbiwgZG8geW91IGhhdmUgYSB0ZWNo bmljYWwgb2JqZWN0aW9uIHRvIHRoZSBwb2xsaW5nIG1lY2hhbmlzbSwgDQo+IGFuZCB3aGF0IGNv dWxkIGJlIGRvbmUgdG8gYWxsZXZpYXRlIGl0Pw0KPg0KPg0KPj4gSXQgaXMgbmV3cyB0byBtZSB0 aGF0IHRoZSBJRVRGIHVzZXMgZm9ybWFsIHBvbGxzIHRvIGFjaGlldmUgDQo+PiBjb25zZW5zdXMu DQo+PiBJJ20gbm90IHN1cmUgdGhpcyBmaXRzIHdlbGwgd2l0aCB0aGUgVGFvLg0KPg0KPiBUaGlz IGlzIGNsZWFybHkgbm90IGEgZm9ybWFsIHBvbGwgbm9yIHdpbGwgb3IgY2FuIGl0IGJlIHVzZWQg dG8gDQo+IGRlY2xhcmUgY29uc2Vuc3VzLiBJdCdzIGFuIGluZm9ybWFsIG1lY2hhbmlzbSB0byBn YXVnZSBXRyBzZW50aW1lbnQsIA0KPiB3aGljaCBpcyBhIHByZWN1cnNvciB0byBkZXRlcm1pbmlu ZyBjb25zZW5zdXMuIEkgdHJpZWQgdG8gbWFrZSB0aGF0IA0KPiBjbGVhciBpbiBteSBlbWFpbCwg YW5kIGFtIHNvcnJ5IEkgd2Fzbid0IHN1Y2Nlc3NmdWwuDQo+DQo+DQo+DQo+PiAtLS0tLU1lc3Nh Z2UgZCdvcmlnaW5lLS0tLS0NCj4+IERlwqA6IEVjcml0IDxlY3JpdC1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3Jn PiBEZSBsYSBwYXJ0IGRlIFJhbmRhbGwgR2VsbGVucyANCj4+IEVudm95w6nCoDogMTQgZMOpY2Vt YnJlIDIwMjEgMTI6MjIgw4DCoDogRUNSSVQgPGVjcml0QGlldGYub3JnPiBPYmpldMKgOg0KPj4g W0VYVF1bRWNyaXRdIFRJTUVMWTogUGxlYXNlIGFuc3dlcjogV2hhdCB0byBkbyB3aXRoIHRoZSAN Cj4+IHBsYW5uZWQtY2hhbmdlcyBkcmFmdA0KPj4NCj4+IFdHIE1lbWJlcnMsDQo+Pg0KPj4gSW4g b3JkZXIgdG8gcmVzb2x2ZSB0aGUga2V5IG9wZW4gaXNzdWUgYW5kIG1vdmUgZm9yd2FyZCB3aXRo IHRoZSANCj4+IHBsYW5uZWQtY2hhbmdlcyBkcmFmdCwgdGhlIGNoYWlycyBhbmQgYXV0aG9yIG5l ZWQgdG8gdW5kZXJzdGFuZCBob3cgDQo+PiBtdWNoIGNvbnNlbnN1cyB3ZSBoYXZlLiBJJ3ZlIGNy ZWF0ZWQgYSBEb29kbGUgcG9sbCB0byBoZWxwIGRvIHRoaXMuDQo+PiBQbGVhc2UgcGljayBvbmUg b2YgdGhlIGZpcnN0IHRocmVlIGNob2ljZXMsIGFuZCwgaWYgYXBwbGljYWJsZSwgDQo+PiBlaXRo ZXIgb2YgdGhlIDNkIGFuZCA0dGggY2hvaWNlcyBhbmQgYWRkIGEgY29tbWVudC4NCj4+DQo+PiBU aGUgZmlyc3QgdGhyZWUgY2hvaWNlcyBhcmU6DQo+Pg0KPj4gLUVpdGhlciBtZWNoYW5pc20gKHBv bGxpbmcgb3Igbm90aWZpY2F0aW9uKSBpcyBPSyB3aXRoIG1lLg0KPj4gLUkgcHJlZmVyIHRoZSBu b3RpZmljYXRpb24gbWVjaGFuaXNtLg0KPj4gLUkgcHJlZmVyIHRoZSBwb2xsaW5nIG1lY2hhbmlz bS4NCj4+DQo+PiBJZiB5b3UgcHJlZmVyIHBvbGxpbmcgb3Igbm90aWZpY2F0aW9uIGJ1dCBjYW4g bGl2ZSB3aXRoIHRoZSBvdGhlciwgDQo+PiBwbGVhc2Ugdm90ZSAiWWVzIiBmb3IgdGhlIG9uZSB5 b3UgcHJlZmVyIGFuZCB2b3RlICJZZXMsIGlmIG5lZWQgYmUiDQo+PiAoYnkNCj4+IGRvdWJsZS1j bGlja2luZykgb24gdGhlIG90aGVyLg0KPj4NCj4+IElmIHlvdSBoYXZlIGEgdGVjaG5pY2FsIG9i amVjdGlvbiB0byBlaXRoZXIgbWVjaGFuaXNtLCBwbGVhc2Ugdm90ZSANCj4+IGZvciB0aGUgM2Qg b3IgNHRoIGNob2ljZSBhbmQgZW50ZXIgYSBjb21tZW50Lg0KPj4NCj4+IFRoZSAzZCBhbmQgNHRo IGNob2ljZXMgYXJlOg0KPj4NCj4+IC1JIGhhdmUgYSB0ZWNobmljYWwgb2JqZWN0aW9uIHRvIHRo ZSBwb2xsaW5nIG1lY2hhbmlzbS4NCj4+IC1JIGhhdmUgYSB0ZWNobmljYWwgb2JqZWN0aW9uIHRv IHRoZSBub3RpZmljYXRpb24gbWVjaGFuaXNtLg0KPj4NCj4+IFRoZSBwb2xsIFVSTDoNCj4+DQo+ PiBodHRwczovL2Rvb2RsZS5jb20vcG9sbC8za3JnMnhoMnlrM2l3dzhyP3V0bV9zb3VyY2U9cG9s bCZ1dG1fbWVkaXVtPWwNCj4+IGkNCj4+IG5rDQo+Pg0KPj4gQXMgYSByZW1pbmRlciwgaXQncyBw ZXJmZWN0bHkgZmluZSB0byB2b3RlIGZvciB0aGUgZmlyc3QgY2hvaWNlIChubw0KPj4gcHJlZmVy ZW5jZSkgYW5kIGxlYXZlIGl0IGF0IHRoYXQuDQo+Pg0KPj4gLS1SYW5kYWxsDQo+Pg0KPj4gX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4+IEVjcml0IG1h aWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPj4gRWNyaXRAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21h aWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vZWNyaXQNCj4+IC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPj4gLQ0KPj4gLS0tLS0tLS0g RXh0ZXJuYWwgRW1haWw6IFBsZWFzZSB1c2UgY2F1dGlvbiB3aGVuIG9wZW5pbmcgbGlua3MgYW5k IA0KPj4gYXR0YWNobWVudHMgLyBDb3VycmllbCBleHRlcm5lOiBTb3lleiBwcnVkZW50IGF2ZWMg bGVzIGxpZW5zIGV0IA0KPj4gZG9jdW1lbnRzIGpvaW50cw0KPiAtLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQo+IC0t LS0tLS0tIEV4dGVybmFsIEVtYWlsOiBQbGVhc2UgdXNlIGNhdXRpb24gd2hlbiBvcGVuaW5nIGxp bmtzIGFuZCANCj4gYXR0YWNobWVudHMgLyBDb3VycmllbCBleHRlcm5lOiBTb3lleiBwcnVkZW50 IGF2ZWMgbGVzIGxpZW5zIGV0IA0KPiBkb2N1bWVudHMgam9pbnRzDQotLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0NCkV4dGVybmFsIEVtYWlsOiBQbGVhc2UgdXNlIGNhdXRpb24gd2hlbiBvcGVuaW5nIGxp bmtzIGFuZCBhdHRhY2htZW50cyAvIENvdXJyaWVsIGV4dGVybmU6IFNveWV6IHBydWRlbnQgYXZl YyBsZXMgbGllbnMgZXQgZG9jdW1lbnRzIGpvaW50cw0K From nobody Wed Dec 15 07:30:01 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D75683A0912 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:29:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 fvLsCag-Rq6k for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:29:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from turing.pensive.org (turing.pensive.org [99.111.97.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9CB23A08FD for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:29:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from [99.111.97.136] (99.111.97.161) by turing.pensive.org with ESMTP (EIMS X 3.3.9); Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:30:29 -0800 From: "Randall Gellens" To: "Caron, Guy" Cc: ECRIT Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:29:54 -0800 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673) Message-ID: <8B5B6BAC-5973-4C08-A858-DA5A70725560@randy.pensive.org> In-Reply-To: <1c0dd9d5b5a94d3d84b42877ea97f095@bell.ca> References: <5951FB8F-1ABA-4EBE-8AC6-2617E5DEC237@randy.pensive.org> <99e181c3518f408cadf2cd421936a528@bell.ca> <1c0dd9d5b5a94d3d84b42877ea97f095@bell.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the planned-changes draft X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 15:30:00 -0000 Hi Guy, Did you accidentally send your message prematurely? I don't see any content from you. --Randall On 15 Dec 2021, at 7:25, Caron, Guy wrote: > In fairness, the chairs and document author are asking WG members to > express a preference for one or the other mechanism, or no preference, > and if they have a preference, to also say if they have a technical > objection to the other mechanism, and if so, what could be done to > alleviate that objection. > > Guy > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Randall Gellens > Envoyé : 15 décembre 2021 10:24 > À : Caron, Guy > Cc : ECRIT > Objet : [EXT]Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the > planned-changes draft > > On 15 Dec 2021, at 7:14, Caron, Guy wrote: > >> "do you have a technical objection to the polling mechanism, and what >> could be done to alleviate it?" >> >> In procedural fairness, I would think the onus is on the proponent of >> the late coming polling proposal to raise technical objections to the >> notification mechanism that makes it inoperable. > > In fairness, the chairs and document author are asking WG members to > express a preference for one or the other mechanism, or no preference, > and if they have a preference, to also say if they have a technical > objection to the other mechanism, and if so, what could be done to > alleviate that objection. > >> >> I made my objections clear in my response. > > I apologize, but I did not see a technical objection in your response. > If you have one, please make it clear. > > Thank you, > > --Randall > > >> -----Message d'origine----- >> De : Randall Gellens Envoyé : 14 >> décembre >> 2021 17:39 À : Caron, Guy Cc : ECRIT >> Objet : [EXT]Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: >> What >> to do with the planned-changes draft >> >> On 14 Dec 2021, at 11:05, Caron, Guy wrote: >> >>> Corporate Security policy blocks access to Doodle. >> >> I'll be happy to fill in your entry for you. >> >> >>> In any event, I'm totally against this drastic change of operation >>> for this draft. >>> >>> I will remind the WG that lost-planned-changes as a *notification >>> mechanism* has been around in IETF ECRIT since November 2013, was >>> turned into a WG item in July 2016 and went through at least two >>> WGLCs. That means that lost-planned-changes as a *notification >>> mechanism* has been out there undisputed for 8 years. >>> >>> More importantly, it has been *normatively referenced as a mandatory >>> requirement* in at least one published standard since 2016. Such a >>> change on the mechanism at this time will likely make some >>> implementations stranded and no longer standards-compliant. >>> >>> Also, the late coming proposal to change from a push notification to >>> a pull does not resolve anything; the notification mechanism as in >>> -04 works with a few tweaks discussed on the list. >>> >>> Finally, the original request that initiate this draft in the first >>> place was to move away from blind polling of a LoST Server for >>> validation requests. The new proposal moves us right back where we >>> started. >>> >>> A simple matter of taste cannot propel such a drastic change of >>> direction. Only significant flaws in the existing mechanism could >>> drive that, and I haven't seen any of that on the list. >> >> Thanks for sharing your views, I appreciate it. It's clear that you >> are prefer the notification mechanism. For the other part of the >> question, do you have a technical objection to the polling mechanism, >> and what could be done to alleviate it? >> >> >>> It is news to me that the IETF uses formal polls to achieve >>> consensus. >>> I'm not sure this fits well with the Tao. >> >> This is clearly not a formal poll nor will or can it be used to >> declare consensus. It's an informal mechanism to gauge WG sentiment, >> which is a precursor to determining consensus. I tried to make that >> clear in my email, and am sorry I wasn't successful. >> >> >> >>> -----Message d'origine----- >>> De : Ecrit De la part de Randall Gellens >>> Envoyé : 14 décembre 2021 12:22 À : ECRIT >>> Objet : >>> [EXT][Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the >>> planned-changes draft >>> >>> WG Members, >>> >>> In order to resolve the key open issue and move forward with the >>> planned-changes draft, the chairs and author need to understand how >>> much consensus we have. I've created a Doodle poll to help do this. >>> Please pick one of the first three choices, and, if applicable, >>> either of the 3d and 4th choices and add a comment. >>> >>> The first three choices are: >>> >>> -Either mechanism (polling or notification) is OK with me. >>> -I prefer the notification mechanism. >>> -I prefer the polling mechanism. >>> >>> If you prefer polling or notification but can live with the other, >>> please vote "Yes" for the one you prefer and vote "Yes, if need be" >>> (by >>> double-clicking) on the other. >>> >>> If you have a technical objection to either mechanism, please vote >>> for the 3d or 4th choice and enter a comment. >>> >>> The 3d and 4th choices are: >>> >>> -I have a technical objection to the polling mechanism. >>> -I have a technical objection to the notification mechanism. >>> >>> The poll URL: >>> >>> https://doodle.com/poll/3krg2xh2yk3iww8r?utm_source=poll&utm_medium=l >>> i >>> nk >>> >>> As a reminder, it's perfectly fine to vote for the first choice (no >>> preference) and leave it at that. >>> >>> --Randall >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ecrit mailing list >>> Ecrit@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> - >>> -------- External Email: Please use caution when opening links and >>> attachments / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et >>> documents joints >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -------- External Email: Please use caution when opening links and >> attachments / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et >> documents joints > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > External Email: Please use caution when opening links and attachments > / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et documents joints From nobody Fri Dec 17 06:15:10 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1D8E3A10EB for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 06:15:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 5qFFKHOwQfrU for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 06:15:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from turing.pensive.org (turing.pensive.org [99.111.97.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43C573A10E7 for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 06:15:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [99.111.97.136] (99.111.97.161) by turing.pensive.org with ESMTP (EIMS X 3.3.9); Fri, 17 Dec 2021 06:15:37 -0800 From: "Randall Gellens" To: ECRIT Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 06:15:00 -0800 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: [Ecrit] PLEASE take one minute to answer the Doodle poll on what to do with the planned-changes draft X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 14:15:07 -0000 PLEASE take one minute to answer the Doodle poll on what to do with the planned-changes draft. WG Members, In order to resolve the key open issue and move forward with the planned-changes draft, the chairs and author need to understand how much consensus we have. I've created a Doodle poll to help do this. Please pick one of the first three choices, and, if applicable, either of the 3d and 4th choices and add a comment. The first three choices are: -Either mechanism (polling or notification) is OK with me. -I prefer the notification mechanism. -I prefer the polling mechanism. If you prefer polling or notification but can live with the other, please vote "Yes" for the one you prefer and vote "Yes, if need be" (by double-clicking) on the other. If you have a technical objection to either mechanism, please vote for the 3d or 4th choice and enter a comment. The 3d and 4th choices are: -I have a technical objection to the polling mechanism. -I have a technical objection to the notification mechanism. The poll URL: https://doodle.com/poll/3krg2xh2yk3iww8r?utm_source=poll&utm_medium=link As a reminder, it's perfectly fine to vote for the first choice (no preference) and leave it at that. --Randall From nobody Wed Dec 22 09:16:11 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A3133A0AA1 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:16:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.887 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=brianrosen-net.20210112.gappssmtp.com 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 P0FGNTG0ajDl for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:16:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-il1-x131.google.com (mail-il1-x131.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::131]) (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 A9BF23A0AA0 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:16:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-il1-x131.google.com with SMTP id e8so2288795ilm.13 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:16:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=brianrosen-net.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=from:mime-version:subject:message-id:date:to; bh=ehgYpseVpaH9GIjuVwgvxmNnt2NX3LwEPx/2yacsjtU=; b=dxwG60rfVQhf6ndkRmuDDGpXT03PYD60qBCLaoLpFYzEwIp8/T4KfNytDxNhkJGDqh Bj4X9jl4T4kA9USxI1xAQDL2PoofiTwij2tJ0s2OPeJU0o/qYRZe5yl0NdC9Mnkf9e7U nhb4etuUZk3lTOJhiuUPVHwa+0pDN0PsVqGY3kooGErcCRQd4ggSliQE1UTFZcLdpp0E oFIdiSyus1otVBKbXZWfBUFjhXDqJkd6meUF77a4rrBpidqUhYyeg1mkclDlzj+WfB+1 rxhXkYCpWqD4OvP+i3hAnfXPPHR74HKuGQjOcvUbMLQpvkuE6vUD8VPuDCT7cfCWUI/q tFwQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:subject:message-id:date:to; bh=ehgYpseVpaH9GIjuVwgvxmNnt2NX3LwEPx/2yacsjtU=; b=us9tp/hJOmHfcD5mS4lsx/BX6m3ZegZ5/jgNnSzz/g6lESVZkRIzkDA6gF+A1q/hu5 cRIr1ahXTY8JvR2nc/riWsThcuVzK5EGYAHdmx90JLpI+PZAImbd/+DUodLWOkwsvtL/ GVvc5JFtAzp6xGAal+iNfNJMiHh5JV0OHu8HZjojTdQyayoI9Yxs82JHYajYQRJ8wyTd O7ZOQVlhA4dPWJkMrmT1CjxOErdts8rh0qgukKKm5YKqheUNvDwHahJGb3WBEkvb2hj0 lc+LRSNk7St9z/OAzIXhMUXQJkGQfYGWLuax8ygS15Ln5m19sfwpYIkvGNzMJF6mZoMn H+/g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533zPK8wO8XB8/ARAAY7b2GNvISbII+ZMajIOEdY8PkPA9qD34Vp nM0YtGK6s24oAyCAQSyb/FXCMXj9Qfzqa93A X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw7f2T/1jG1k6zHzRmkJnyViciI+hTD7H8951Og3lQibnPPgEOt28mNUFd8munSb3ZIEtmRpQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1c0e:: with SMTP id l14mr1863914ilh.16.1640193363638; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:16:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (dynamic-acs-24-154-121-237.zoominternet.net. [24.154.121.237]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 7sm1652572ilq.23.2021.12.22.09.16.02 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:16:03 -0800 (PST) From: Brian Rosen Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9099CC3C-A379-4E8F-B0AD-644438BDF66C" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.20.0.1.32\)) Message-Id: <9D77D6A3-F009-4446-8343-7625B7412A1C@brianrosen.net> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 12:16:01 -0500 To: ECRIT X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.20.0.1.32) Archived-At: Subject: [Ecrit] New draft to create registries for emergency services X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 17:16:10 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_9099CC3C-A379-4E8F-B0AD-644438BDF66C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Today I submitted a draft: = https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-rosen-ecrit-emergency-registries-00.= html = This draft creates a new area in IANA registries and a whole bunch of = registries. This draft came about because prior to this effort, similar = registries were created and maintained by the =E2=80=9CNENA Registry = System=E2=80=9D. NENA was approached by ETSI which is working on = emergency standards similar to NENA=E2=80=99s. They asked that the = registries be renamed and maintained by IANA rather than NENA. NENA = agreed to pursue this as part of a goal to (eventually) create a single = world wide standard for how emergency calls are handled. =20 The registries defined here don=E2=80=99t have any content. There are a = few NENA documents that populate these registries. It=E2=80=99s going = to be difficult to actually modify the definitions we have in this = document, because the NENA document assumes they look like this document = describes them. So, suggestions for improvement are welcome, and we=E2=80=99= ll work towards improving anything you find, but we may have to delay = making any changes while we coordinate with the NENA documents that = depend on them. Also, FYI, IANA has reviewed a draft of this document, and we have made = some changes in response to their comments, but you can assume they are = okay with how we are proposing to handle these registries. Note, in = particular, that we expressly allow other emergency services standards = organizations to create new registries and subregistries in this area, = under IESG managed expert review. If we find this document to be reasonable, I will ask that it be adopted = by ecrit and completed as a standards-track RFC. Brian --Apple-Mail=_9099CC3C-A379-4E8F-B0AD-644438BDF66C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Today I submitted a = draft: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-rosen-ecrit-emergency-reg= istries-00.html

This draft creates a new area in IANA registries and a whole = bunch of registries.  This draft came about because prior to this = effort, similar registries were created and maintained by the =E2=80=9CNEN= A Registry System=E2=80=9D.  NENA was approached by ETSI which is = working on emergency standards similar to NENA=E2=80=99s.  They = asked that the registries be renamed and maintained by IANA rather than = NENA.  NENA agreed to pursue this as part of a goal to (eventually) = create a single world wide standard for how emergency calls are handled. =  

The = registries defined here don=E2=80=99t have any content.  There are = a few NENA documents that populate these registries.  It=E2=80=99s = going to be difficult to actually modify the definitions we have in this = document, because the NENA document assumes they look like this document = describes them. So, suggestions for improvement are welcome, and we=E2=80=99= ll work towards improving anything you find, but we may have to delay = making any changes while we coordinate with the NENA documents that = depend on them.

Also, FYI, IANA has reviewed a draft of this document, and we = have made some changes in response to their comments, but you can assume = they are okay with how we are proposing to handle these registries. =  Note, in particular, that we expressly allow other emergency = services standards organizations to create new registries and = subregistries in this area, under IESG managed expert review.

If we find this document = to be reasonable, I will ask that it be adopted by ecrit and completed = as a standards-track RFC.

Brian

= --Apple-Mail=_9099CC3C-A379-4E8F-B0AD-644438BDF66C-- From nobody Mon Dec 27 07:06:27 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C6333A0CBB for ; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 07:06:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 C07SuLy_Q5MR for ; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 07:06:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from turing.pensive.org (turing.pensive.org [99.111.97.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31D9C3A0CBA for ; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 07:06:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from [99.111.97.136] (99.111.97.161) by turing.pensive.org with ESMTP (EIMS X 3.3.9); Mon, 27 Dec 2021 07:07:03 -0800 From: "Randall Gellens" To: ECRIT Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2021 07:06:19 -0800 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: [Ecrit] TODAY: Answer Doodle poll on what to do with the planned-changes draft X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2021 15:06:26 -0000 PLEASE take one minute TODAY to answer the Doodle poll on what to do with the planned-changes draft. WG Members, In order to resolve the key open issue and move forward with the planned-changes draft, the chairs and author need to understand how much consensus we have. I've created a Doodle poll to help do this. Please pick one of the first three choices, and, if applicable, either of the 3d and 4th choices and add a comment. The first three choices are: -Either mechanism (polling or notification) is OK with me. -I prefer the notification mechanism. -I prefer the polling mechanism. If you prefer polling or notification but can live with the other, please vote "Yes" for the one you prefer and vote "Yes, if need be" (by double-clicking) on the other. If you have a technical objection to either mechanism, please vote for the 3d or 4th choice and enter a comment. The 3d and 4th choices are: -I have a technical objection to the polling mechanism. -I have a technical objection to the notification mechanism. The poll URL: https://doodle.com/poll/3krg2xh2yk3iww8r?utm_source=poll&utm_medium=link As a reminder, it's perfectly fine to vote for the first choice (no preference) and leave it at that. --Randall From nobody Mon Dec 27 10:15:03 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A1B53A101B for ; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:15:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 Ea2aQfpIytvr for ; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:14:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from turing.pensive.org (turing.pensive.org [99.111.97.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 508DF3A101A for ; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:14:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [99.111.97.136] (99.111.97.161) by turing.pensive.org with ESMTP (EIMS X 3.3.9); Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:15:40 -0800 From: "Randall Gellens" To: "Caron, Guy" Cc: ECRIT Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:14:55 -0800 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1c0dd9d5b5a94d3d84b42877ea97f095@bell.ca> References: <5951FB8F-1ABA-4EBE-8AC6-2617E5DEC237@randy.pensive.org> <99e181c3518f408cadf2cd421936a528@bell.ca> <1c0dd9d5b5a94d3d84b42877ea97f095@bell.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the planned-changes draft X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2021 18:15:02 -0000 Guy, Thank you for voting in the poll. Please explain your technical objection to the polling option. Thank you, --Randall On 15 Dec 2021, at 7:25, Caron, Guy wrote: > In fairness, the chairs and document author are asking WG members to > express a preference for one or the other mechanism, or no preference, > and if they have a preference, to also say if they have a technical > objection to the other mechanism, and if so, what could be done to > alleviate that objection. > > Guy > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Randall Gellens > Envoyé : 15 décembre 2021 10:24 > À : Caron, Guy > Cc : ECRIT > Objet : [EXT]Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the > planned-changes draft > > On 15 Dec 2021, at 7:14, Caron, Guy wrote: > >> "do you have a technical objection to the polling mechanism, and what >> could be done to alleviate it?" >> >> In procedural fairness, I would think the onus is on the proponent of >> the late coming polling proposal to raise technical objections to the >> notification mechanism that makes it inoperable. > > In fairness, the chairs and document author are asking WG members to > express a preference for one or the other mechanism, or no preference, > and if they have a preference, to also say if they have a technical > objection to the other mechanism, and if so, what could be done to > alleviate that objection. > >> >> I made my objections clear in my response. > > I apologize, but I did not see a technical objection in your response. > If you have one, please make it clear. > > Thank you, > > --Randall > > >> -----Message d'origine----- >> De : Randall Gellens Envoyé : 14 >> décembre >> 2021 17:39 À : Caron, Guy Cc : ECRIT >> Objet : [EXT]Re: [Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: >> What >> to do with the planned-changes draft >> >> On 14 Dec 2021, at 11:05, Caron, Guy wrote: >> >>> Corporate Security policy blocks access to Doodle. >> >> I'll be happy to fill in your entry for you. >> >> >>> In any event, I'm totally against this drastic change of operation >>> for this draft. >>> >>> I will remind the WG that lost-planned-changes as a *notification >>> mechanism* has been around in IETF ECRIT since November 2013, was >>> turned into a WG item in July 2016 and went through at least two >>> WGLCs. That means that lost-planned-changes as a *notification >>> mechanism* has been out there undisputed for 8 years. >>> >>> More importantly, it has been *normatively referenced as a mandatory >>> requirement* in at least one published standard since 2016. Such a >>> change on the mechanism at this time will likely make some >>> implementations stranded and no longer standards-compliant. >>> >>> Also, the late coming proposal to change from a push notification to >>> a pull does not resolve anything; the notification mechanism as in >>> -04 works with a few tweaks discussed on the list. >>> >>> Finally, the original request that initiate this draft in the first >>> place was to move away from blind polling of a LoST Server for >>> validation requests. The new proposal moves us right back where we >>> started. >>> >>> A simple matter of taste cannot propel such a drastic change of >>> direction. Only significant flaws in the existing mechanism could >>> drive that, and I haven't seen any of that on the list. >> >> Thanks for sharing your views, I appreciate it. It's clear that you >> are prefer the notification mechanism. For the other part of the >> question, do you have a technical objection to the polling mechanism, >> and what could be done to alleviate it? >> >> >>> It is news to me that the IETF uses formal polls to achieve >>> consensus. >>> I'm not sure this fits well with the Tao. >> >> This is clearly not a formal poll nor will or can it be used to >> declare consensus. It's an informal mechanism to gauge WG sentiment, >> which is a precursor to determining consensus. I tried to make that >> clear in my email, and am sorry I wasn't successful. >> >> >> >>> -----Message d'origine----- >>> De : Ecrit De la part de Randall Gellens >>> Envoyé : 14 décembre 2021 12:22 À : ECRIT >>> Objet : >>> [EXT][Ecrit] TIMELY: Please answer: What to do with the >>> planned-changes draft >>> >>> WG Members, >>> >>> In order to resolve the key open issue and move forward with the >>> planned-changes draft, the chairs and author need to understand how >>> much consensus we have. I've created a Doodle poll to help do this. >>> Please pick one of the first three choices, and, if applicable, >>> either of the 3d and 4th choices and add a comment. >>> >>> The first three choices are: >>> >>> -Either mechanism (polling or notification) is OK with me. >>> -I prefer the notification mechanism. >>> -I prefer the polling mechanism. >>> >>> If you prefer polling or notification but can live with the other, >>> please vote "Yes" for the one you prefer and vote "Yes, if need be" >>> (by >>> double-clicking) on the other. >>> >>> If you have a technical objection to either mechanism, please vote >>> for the 3d or 4th choice and enter a comment. >>> >>> The 3d and 4th choices are: >>> >>> -I have a technical objection to the polling mechanism. >>> -I have a technical objection to the notification mechanism. >>> >>> The poll URL: >>> >>> https://doodle.com/poll/3krg2xh2yk3iww8r?utm_source=poll&utm_medium=l >>> i >>> nk >>> >>> As a reminder, it's perfectly fine to vote for the first choice (no >>> preference) and leave it at that. >>> >>> --Randall >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ecrit mailing list >>> Ecrit@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> - >>> -------- External Email: Please use caution when opening links and >>> attachments / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et >>> documents joints >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -------- External Email: Please use caution when opening links and >> attachments / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et >> documents joints > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > External Email: Please use caution when opening links and attachments > / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et documents joints From nobody Tue Dec 28 11:00:11 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E38A73A1885 for ; Tue, 28 Dec 2021 11:00:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=comtechtel.com 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 MramUc1QKchx for ; Tue, 28 Dec 2021 11:00:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from GCC02-DM3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm3gcc02on20706.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:7d04::706]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C00123A1884 for ; Tue, 28 Dec 2021 11:00:02 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=ODqxpkF2cdNXZ4jn0jEAAngbdqZChdY43BYPHyMMdKqGcZ7fvfqqi01Tngt0/jkpmw6Zzr9wbh4MWFh5+gxJC7w+lYOVHQhuXjftuVQNMsINB7x+65hxT5NVKIqavOpHZMk/Z+Kvg/i0H4exnvuW/WpsInWCVtXSFZ1B3kd1+CloBm7V5RAGjpdJblFoDqpYeEU92U5K9fh8Z/rPnsUbbx30qfWGTbm9GiUteXI8B6n2s3JdZ4DjrdmDQQee8E8h5Xfdu9ntpPtgR8EdOssGQvI/fuRPY3lpWGpbYu0v3Ipl9oEuq9CoQjkK6fic0r9jnMKlTYx4R6A/G4GppV8ffw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=2bYFfEcmjKV4cm/CCl+SDmkg0kksmYomeKTbsk5jgKw=; b=hT3F0ou8f2YXC2ZH6YzCabS6cAVYOhOImfLT5sF56a0VhgtN0pHwellck/J052i30dPc2hbZSwm82V6GOTttttPnM0e4TJyE9yYqnbjBQxPsshTG1OlbFGPKdWWbwHzwjLM0V6BEUmD7DCtNJgJt30/ogy/vk5Ycg65Jc9Ag/w/xRO5u4BoZQGolpEDXciwBiR22+eVINuXl41hSqpCszbJMn2hxt9J+aspJsKBFAJDabPQykcvulhSzdpyJFPUF6ZE0ZiddMPOA6wKgEtM+nUiM4/iPuiPdb4CsJXHM/0qp4vwmH4KwYRc5CyeEFb9k2mDlLapMzpKaM/FViSwpDg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=comtechtel.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=comtechtel.com; dkim=pass header.d=comtechtel.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comtechtel.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=2bYFfEcmjKV4cm/CCl+SDmkg0kksmYomeKTbsk5jgKw=; b=A9vWxvzjJyclG8pCnVdvt5B96RalaJGgeqidcUZ+eVKdRVZOy39mh8YbT2kii/pkkIl/l0F97ZPaouv9047tZ1Dq4LshemZqJPP6YQrh6tXx2fXcnpphNtsohg7iZsWEI/h8UxbUYajUiGngFig1HTsvW/qBo6ryoCeoxNn+REou5/VNYCNEmzfUvYnT+KREKasJTH0R8DG1tZEtpyX/vgmPoZNeDGHQLCl0KqTeU0dYYD5ng8Jdx9xEQQqLiWvPthwvLXU9tJ6/YS7ZpyARLxR2JxfDb74iqDVv4DQRwjCCzssS/HQ7LtSmvMG7LYwAqG9ayM/6p9xOkcuNI1Z1aQ== Received: from CO6PR09MB8007.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:303:cd::13) by CO6PR09MB8277.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:303:d0::18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4823.19; Tue, 28 Dec 2021 18:59:53 +0000 Received: from CO6PR09MB8007.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::41e4:859b:cc5a:97be]) by CO6PR09MB8007.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::41e4:859b:cc5a:97be%4]) with mapi id 15.20.4823.023; Tue, 28 Dec 2021 18:59:53 +0000 From: Victor Burton To: Brian Rosen , ECRIT Thread-Topic: [Ecrit] New draft to create registries for emergency services Thread-Index: AQHX91fElg+nzjM2fk2XUm6QV7SknqxISaqw Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2021 18:59:53 +0000 Message-ID: References: <9D77D6A3-F009-4446-8343-7625B7412A1C@brianrosen.net> In-Reply-To: <9D77D6A3-F009-4446-8343-7625B7412A1C@brianrosen.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=comtechtel.com; x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: b2c48a37-68e0-4e1e-448c-08d9ca343b76 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: CO6PR09MB8277:EE_ x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:3513; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-ms-exchange-antispam-relay: 0 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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 x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:CO6PR09MB8007.namprd09.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(366004)(7696005)(83380400001)(52536014)(316002)(6506007)(86362001)(66946007)(166002)(66556008)(38100700002)(122000001)(64756008)(8936002)(5660300002)(66446008)(76116006)(38070700005)(53546011)(110136005)(8676002)(66476007)(9686003)(26005)(33656002)(508600001)(71200400001)(44832011)(55016003)(186003)(2906002)(966005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: =?us-ascii?Q?gT/R08Rk+6hdGaUnBUuBRxpvByuDXCVV7FeHlydVsyTJtMX3WHmqig7sT4q+?= =?us-ascii?Q?K/lvxAzFhs5z/tg92vJwxfDzvQrjkdnRtg0iJ57uURH+6e5Io9p4YpfsYoLt?= =?us-ascii?Q?VqbFB/t+KKLLtvh604haXGVxNNcmIabhTVCu6la8FdcE3lkvH30jLWLWhG9I?= =?us-ascii?Q?g1GZoyaFI7sKesJPAYxmdMo4qJCAJZ/7eyXqpOLecSQh69rHbhxoPlOPAShl?= =?us-ascii?Q?xdvG7txa73REZP/lOm7N9/vFjOQakhdnktZoDY5X4LKFrnNqJOiqYPazPtLp?= =?us-ascii?Q?otRQCbv9Sg8RTapTJySXAzY5mrfm8gs+X+Uq9V7ZldMEVQtmII9ShoSnIEAg?= =?us-ascii?Q?Wy8tTCD61z9iNX2F8v0LMSYYElc8ZB7I6Suh50ZOnp/V690lSovqHd0DMsV0?= =?us-ascii?Q?qe8hxA9r737+uW6hesQZl45Xf5tHShfLZUNuFLwNC33lvoULSy+qgIvr40Wg?= =?us-ascii?Q?0pKIQMnRdCF6u4DGjLqcGaVIkfwXj4lqo4HKePeOvHyaZUhb3elpUcTAUy1o?= =?us-ascii?Q?x0k3/BkW4sQ4B3qTmtzJyxF9y81PxPrNvxr+x/nWqcrO/LTQ+9JgEBQfuBsP?= =?us-ascii?Q?Ex58JaSoP8DkKikS9mHtWLWahy7Xv38JAm7ttVkgcWd7ZJ59/QxCdxYy3WLB?= =?us-ascii?Q?ZF2fd3cPvokgMikeCgQzT4NSxHrT2ozLe6mP49CdUJ1obefo5/dFvHuCYVwK?= =?us-ascii?Q?quHBj6j/jUfbetME69iBuQVocmbw61zTWE9a/py0R9p7uOYweYOvl/vfTBFZ?= =?us-ascii?Q?2fiFROPaiq10oN8Ni+sq/LHc4TIQV2fgtuzg+dj4TSS3MKAIp+qb5lh5qXSi?= =?us-ascii?Q?v7nlVfpOJvMbNZVZ3FBTVmH4iui5hDclLFY9xGPHW/JUsVObxRvkF9Mb0pmm?= =?us-ascii?Q?olgYuXS2V5EzQBtghyuVgX9ofrmBb98bWsaAa+iOxG52xH/e3xiZiMay3iXH?= =?us-ascii?Q?g80kdLK5nV9mUCfHFKZg380y53Q8Uo4+HcyWrXpkPms680yjFYscar32taXY?= =?us-ascii?Q?P3cuzHuAbqAlFXxliH2AE6FRRb2zVWH3WHGvX36JYVlQ+IUj6wBHGd0fZ68g?= =?us-ascii?Q?lkxCCToBjcYtKtTCp0SH/TiyuMunDIA6A/z0GJtVFgLfjmKAbOmvFg1U0LAo?= =?us-ascii?Q?ERWJAXorsVOrHw2p20xsJNycQkeTXwv/kChsIGgwVADIRMln2EJFV9v9gVQ6?= =?us-ascii?Q?Gj96Juxn1/RGdmF2EOIlS/wAhWBRMxD66P2ivuI9XpSC/5swt0SZjN2POIQd?= =?us-ascii?Q?GD5NjwEJSloEu29qRQcAFwtRg+5qp90Xs+cMaeWqTNqYkZuL8fBgqlaauwVZ?= =?us-ascii?Q?TqKVxnNNPsdTkMGICQZvLA1O?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CO6PR09MB8007AD8273FD8F8F0FBB6F4698439CO6PR09MB8007namp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: comtechtel.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: CO6PR09MB8007.namprd09.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: b2c48a37-68e0-4e1e-448c-08d9ca343b76 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 Dec 2021 18:59:53.0916 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: a9a26e69-6ae0-40c1-bd80-1ca6cc677828 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CO6PR09MB8277 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ecrit] New draft to create registries for emergency services X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2021 19:00:09 -0000 --_000_CO6PR09MB8007AD8273FD8F8F0FBB6F4698439CO6PR09MB8007namp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable First read of the draft and noticed a couple editorials. Section 4.4.5.1 - second paragraph spelling "Esternal" to "External" Section 4.4.5.2 - grammar "creates" to "create" Victor From: Ecrit On Behalf Of Brian Rosen Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 9:16 AM To: ECRIT Subject: [Ecrit] New draft to create registries for emergency services WARNING: External Email: Exercise Caution Today I submitted a draft: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-rosen-ecri= t-emergency-registries-00.html This draft creates a new area in IANA registries and a whole bunch of regis= tries. This draft came about because prior to this effort, similar registr= ies were created and maintained by the "NENA Registry System". NENA was ap= proached by ETSI which is working on emergency standards similar to NENA's.= They asked that the registries be renamed and maintained by IANA rather t= han NENA. NENA agreed to pursue this as part of a goal to (eventually) cre= ate a single world wide standard for how emergency calls are handled. The registries defined here don't have any content. There are a few NENA d= ocuments that populate these registries. It's going to be difficult to act= ually modify the definitions we have in this document, because the NENA doc= ument assumes they look like this document describes them. So, suggestions = for improvement are welcome, and we'll work towards improving anything you = find, but we may have to delay making any changes while we coordinate with = the NENA documents that depend on them. Also, FYI, IANA has reviewed a draft of this document, and we have made som= e changes in response to their comments, but you can assume they are okay w= ith how we are proposing to handle these registries. Note, in particular, = that we expressly allow other emergency services standards organizations to= create new registries and subregistries in this area, under IESG managed e= xpert review. If we find this document to be reasonable, I will ask that it be adopted by= ecrit and completed as a standards-track RFC. Brian NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: This email, including attachments, may contain informa= tion which is confidential, proprietary, attorney-client privileged and / o= r controlled under U.S. export laws and regulations and may be restricted f= rom disclosure by applicable State and Federal law. Nothing in this email s= hall create any legal binding agreement between the parties unless expressl= y stated herein and provided by an authorized representative of Comtech Tel= ecommunications Corp. or its subsidiaries. If you are not the intended reci= pient of this message, be advised that any dissemination, distribution, or = use of the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you received= this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email and pe= rmanently delete all copies of the original email and any attached document= ation from any computer or other media. --_000_CO6PR09MB8007AD8273FD8F8F0FBB6F4698439CO6PR09MB8007namp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

First read of the draft and noticed a couple editori= als.

 

Section 4.4.5.1 - second paragraph spelling “E= sternal” to “External”

Section 4.4.5.2 – grammar “creates”= ; to “create”

 

Victor

 

From: Ecrit <ecrit-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Brian Rosen
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 9:16 AM
To: ECRIT <ecrit@ietf.org>
Subject: [Ecrit] New draft to create registries for emergency servic= es

 

 

WARNING: External Email: Exercise Caution

Today I submitted a draft: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-rosen-ecrit-emergency-reg= istries-00.html

 

This draft creates a new area in IANA registries and= a whole bunch of registries.  This draft came about because prior to = this effort, similar registries were created and maintained by the “N= ENA Registry System”.  NENA was approached by ETSI which is working on emergency standards similar to NENA’s. &nbs= p;They asked that the registries be renamed and maintained by IANA rather t= han NENA.  NENA agreed to pursue this as part of a goal to (eventually= ) create a single world wide standard for how emergency calls are handled.  

 

The registries defined here don’t have any con= tent.  There are a few NENA documents that populate these registries. =  It’s going to be difficult to actually modify the definitions w= e have in this document, because the NENA document assumes they look like this document describes them. So, suggestions for improveme= nt are welcome, and we’ll work towards improving anything you find, b= ut we may have to delay making any changes while we coordinate with the NEN= A documents that depend on them.

 

Also, FYI, IANA has reviewed a draft of this documen= t, and we have made some changes in response to their comments, but you can= assume they are okay with how we are proposing to handle these registries.=  Note, in particular, that we expressly allow other emergency services standards organizations to create new regis= tries and subregistries in this area, under IESG managed expert review.

 

If we find this document to be reasonable, I will as= k that it be adopted by ecrit and completed as a standards-track RFC.<= /o:p>

 

Brian

 

NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: This email, including attachments, may contain informa= tion which is confidential, proprietary, attorney-client privileged and / o= r controlled under U.S. export laws and regulations and may be restricted f= rom disclosure by applicable State and Federal law. Nothing in this email shall create any legal binding agre= ement between the parties unless expressly stated herein and provided by an= authorized representative of Comtech Telecommunications Corp. or its subsi= diaries. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, be advised that any dissemination, distribution= , or use of the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you rec= eived this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email a= nd permanently delete all copies of the original email and any attached documentation from any computer or = other media. --_000_CO6PR09MB8007AD8273FD8F8F0FBB6F4698439CO6PR09MB8007namp_--