Subject: [dns-privacy] Status of draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis?

From: Rob Sayre <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2020 23:20:09 -0700

Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Greetings again. A document on which I am a co-author refers to
> draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis. As I was updating references in that
> draft, I thought that maybe draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis was done.
> However, according to
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis/,
> this draft's state has be "AD followup" for many months now.
>
> Is there something that the draft authors or the DPRIVE WG need to do to
> help move this forward?

Other recent submissions have changed their references to RFC 7626. What
changes in the 7626-bis document are important to you?

thanks,
Rob

---

From: Vittorio Bertola <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 11:56:20 +0200 (CEST)

>     Il 21/09/2020 08:20 Rob Sayre <[email-masked]> ha scritto:
> 
> 
>     Paul Hoffman <[email-masked] mailto:[email-masked] > wrote:
> 
>     > However, according to https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis/,
>     Other recent submissions have changed their references to RFC 7626. What changes in the 7626-bis document are important to you?
> 
To me, the question is different: the working group has put substantial effort into this document, for about two years. It even went to last call, receiving a single objection. I thought this meant that we had more or less reached rough consensus, but that single objection prompted several more months and several more revisions to address those objections and new objections that were added after those objections were solved. Ok, it's fine if we can make the document better, but at a certain point in time one would expect that the document gets finalized and published - there is always time to start working on further documents if needed. Instead, the document seems to be lost in a limbo forever. Honestly, this does not encourage people to commit their time and contribute.

--

Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange
[email-masked] mailto:[email-masked] 
Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy

---

From: Brian Haberman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:20:02 -0400

Hi Rob,

> changes in the 7626-bis document are important to you?

The changes made to the BCP document were driven by feedback from IESG
members who rightly pointed out that the BCP referred to text originally
found in 7626 and that 7626-bis was in a state of churn. In order to
move the BCP forward, it was determined that the references could be
safely changed to 7626.

I cannot speak to changes made in other documents.

Regards,
Brian

---

From: Rob Sayre <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 19:07:31 -0700

On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 5:20 AM Brian Haberman <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> found in 7626 and that 7626-bis was in a state of churn.
>

That makes sense to me. I was only pointing out that the same tradeoff
might apply to Paul's document.

I personally don't understand what 7626-bis adds, and it doesn't seem like
completing the revision has been a pressing concern.

thanks,
Rob

---

From: Rob Sayre <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2020 21:11:52 -0700

"most people are actually quite happy about their regime and often even
happy not to live in a Western democracy "

- Vittorio Bertola

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/add/DQc7CHHXBCv8NC7c71iYN_UbPXY/

thanks,
Rob

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 2:56 AM Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola=
[email-masked]> wrote:

> To me, the question is different: the working group has put substantial
> effort into this document, for about two years. It even went to last call,
> receiving a single objection. I thought this meant that we had more or less
> reached rough consensus, but that single objection prompted several more
> months and several more revisions to address those objections and new
> objections that were added after those objections were solved. Ok, it's
> fine if we can make the document better, but at a certain point in time one
> would expect that the document gets finalized and published - there is
> always time to start working on further documents if needed. Instead, the
> document seems to be lost in a limbo forever. Honestly, this does not
> encourage people to commit their time and contribute.
>
> --
>
> [email-masked]
> _______________________________________________
> dns-privacy mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
>