Re: [HOKEY] I-D Action:draft-ietf-hokey-emsk-hierarchy-05.txt

["Dan Harkins" <dharkins at lounge.org>]

  It is most definitely not merely curiosity about procedure.
Specifically, it's about issue #45. You've been copied on emails to
the people you list below.

  Where is the issue list anyway? One would naively assume that it
would be the "issues" link off http://tools.ietf.org/wg/hokey/ but
there is nothing there.

  I understand comments can be rejected. Does one just infers that
a comment has been rejected because all of a sudden the draft's status
changes? Not knowing where the issue list resides one could also infer
that an issue was "lost". I raised an issue in WGLC and heard nothing
about resolution of it and then all of a sudden I notice the draft is
in IETF LC. Was the issue rejected? Was it lost? Dunno. Am I supposed to
just wait for an announcement of publication from the RFC editor to find
out about #45? That doesn't sound right.

  If the process is intentionally opaque then that would be nice to
know. Just tell me and I'll just go away and grumble to myself.

  Dan.

On Thu, April 24, 2008 1:05 am, Glen Zorn wrote:
> Dan Harkins <> scribbled on :
>
>>  Hi,
>>
>>  There's no "changes from -04" section of the -05 draft so
>> what changed? And why? Is this in response to some comments in IETF
>> LC? If so, which ones? And what about the other comments in IETF
>> LC received on -04 that were not addressed in -05? What's the
>> procedure on addressing them? Is there going to be an -06?
>
> Since the state of the document is "Waiting for AD Go-Ahead", hopefully
> not.
>
>>
>>  A note to the chairmen: what happens to comments on -04 that
>> weren't addressed in -05? Should they be made _again_ (and
>> again and again) on on -05 or do they "carry over"?
>
> There are a couple of ways that comments can be addressed:
>
> 1) the document may be changed in response to the comment(s)
> 2) the comment(s) may be temporarily set aside pending further
> discussion on the list
> 3) the comment(s) may be rejected
>
> In the case of #2 the comments will eventually be considered & end up in
> either bin #1 or bin # 2.  Comments may be rejected for several reasons
> including (but not limited to) irrelevance and contradiction of WG
> consensus; just because a given comment didn't result in the document in
> question being changed doesn't mean that it wasn't addressed.  At this
> point in the lifecycle of a draft, the "AD is responsible for verifying
> that all Last Call comments have been adequately addressed" (see
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/idtracker/help/state/19/).  In this case
> the AD referenced would be Tim Polk (copied).
>
>>
>>  Inquiring minds want to know....
>
> Are there some particular comments you have in mind or is it just a
> matter of curiosity about procedures?  If the former, please discuss the
> matter w/Tim (copying, if you don't mind,
> mailto:hokey-chairs at tools.ietf.org or the WG).
>
>>
>>  Dan.
>>
>
> ...
>


_______________________________________________
HOKEY mailing list
HOKEY at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hokey