[kitten] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis-03: (with COMMENT)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[kitten] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis-03: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell
Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis-03: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

- 4.3, 2nd paragraph: Absent what sort of other information? That's a bit
vague for a condition for a MUST.

-9: Isn't Sam an author? :-)


_______________________________________________
Kitten mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [kitten] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis-03: (with COMMENT)

Benjamin Kaduk-2
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 08:34:42PM -0800, Ben Campbell wrote:

> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis-03: No Objection
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> - 4.3, 2nd paragraph: Absent what sort of other information? That's a bit
> vague for a condition for a MUST.

Presumably, something like an acknowledgment from the client that it is
willing to assume the loss of privacy.

> -9: Isn't Sam an author? :-)

Yes :)
Well, Sam was an author of 6112 and is included here because the document
is hardly changing.

-Ben

_______________________________________________
Kitten mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [kitten] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis-03: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell
On 29 Nov 2016, at 22:54, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 08:34:42PM -0800, Ben Campbell wrote:
>> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis-03: No Objection
>>
>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis/
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> - 4.3, 2nd paragraph: Absent what sort of other information? That's a
>> bit
>> vague for a condition for a MUST.
>
> Presumably, something like an acknowledgment from the client that it
> is
> willing to assume the loss of privacy.

Would it make sense to drop the phrase?  (If this is a pre-bis leftover,
that's fine.)

>
>> -9: Isn't Sam an author? :-)
>
> Yes :)
> Well, Sam was an author of 6112 and is included here because the
> document
> is hardly changing.

To be clear, I did not mean to object to Sam's authorship--I was just
checking to make sure the acknowledgement of an author was on purpose.

Ben.

_______________________________________________
Kitten mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [kitten] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis-03: (with COMMENT)

Shawn M Emery
On 11/29/16 10:11 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:

> On 29 Nov 2016, at 22:54, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 08:34:42PM -0800, Ben Campbell wrote:
>>> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
>>> draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis-03: No Objection
>>>
>>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> COMMENT:
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> - 4.3, 2nd paragraph: Absent what sort of other information? That's
>>> a bit
>>> vague for a condition for a MUST.
>>
>> Presumably, something like an acknowledgment from the client that it is
>> willing to assume the loss of privacy.
>
> Would it make sense to drop the phrase?  (If this is a pre-bis
> leftover, that's fine.)

Thanks for your comments.

This text is pre-bis and I also interpret this text in the same context
as Ben Kaduk has.

Shawn.
--

>>
>>> -9: Isn't Sam an author? :-)
>>
>> Yes :)
>> Well, Sam was an author of 6112 and is included here because the
>> document
>> is hardly changing.
>
> To be clear, I did not mean to object to Sam's authorship--I was just
> checking to make sure the acknowledgement of an author was on purpose.
>
> Ben.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kitten mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten
>

_______________________________________________
Kitten mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten