Subject: [PANRG] I-D Action: draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do-10.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2020 19:53:17 -0700

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Path Aware Networking RG RG of the IRTF.

        Title           : Path Aware Networking: Obstacles to Deployment (A Bestiary of Roads Not Taken)
        Author          : Spencer Dawkins
	Filename        : draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do-10.txt
	Pages           : 36
	Date            : 2020-07-07

Abstract:
   At the first meeting of the Path Aware Networking Research Group, the
   research group agreed to catalog and analyze past efforts to develop
   and deploy Path Aware techniques, most of which were unsuccessful or
   at most partially successful, in order to extract insights and
   lessons for path-aware networking researchers.

   This document contains that catalog and analysis.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do/

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do-10
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do-10

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do-10

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 22:02:22 -0500

Dear Brian and Jen,

This version now points to the working definition of "path awareness" in
panrg-questions. From my perspective, it's ready to go forward for
publication.

Make good choices, of course.

Best,

Spencer

On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 9:53 PM <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> Panrg mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/panrg
>

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 10:33:16 -0500

I got this comment in private e-mail, but I'm responding on-list, because
the comment affects at least two working group drafts. My apologies to Med
for that.

Hi Med,

On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 9:37 AM <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hi Spencer,
>
>
>
> Other than the version change, I don’t see any “text” change in -10.
>

I managed to trip over a bug in the datatracker/tools pages submitting -09
(Robert and Henrik are still nudging everything back into place), so -10
was just a resubmit with the version number bumped. Doing
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do-09.txt
shows the actual diff I was submitting.

If you have to make a change, I would rather include the definition rather
> than adding a pointer to the questions I-D. I don’t think it is a good idea
> to have I-D.irtf-panrg-questions as normative.
>

I may have misunderstood the details about what we talked about at the
PANRG interim meeting. Let me ask the research group, so I'm only
submitting one update, if that's needed.

What I'm pretty sure we agreed, was to have the draft authors go off in a
corner and come up with a working definition that would go in -questions,
rather than have four definitions (one in the charter and three in our
research group drafts).

So far, so good ...

It seemed right to me that I would point to the definition in -
I-D.irtf-panrg-questions in what-not-to-do, rather than repeat the working
definition in what-not-to-do.

It seemed right to me that the reference to  I-D.irtf-panrg-questions would
be normative, so that's what I did.

ANOTHER way of doing this, is repeating the definition from
I-D.irtf-panrg-questions in what-not-to-do, with an informative reference
to  I-D.irtf-panrg-questions.

Does anyone object to me copying the definition over?

Best,

Spencer

>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Med
>
>
>
> *De :* Panrg [mailto:[email-masked]] *De la part de* Spencer
> Dawkins at IETF
> *Envoyé :* mercredi 8 juillet 2020 05:02
> *À :* [email-masked]
> *Cc :* [email-masked]
> *Objet :* Re: [PANRG] I-D Action: draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do-10.txt
>
>
>
> Dear Brian and Jen,
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
>
>

---

From: Jen Linkova <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:18:24 +1000

On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 1:33 AM Spencer Dawkins at IETF
<[email-masked]> wrote:
> It seemed right to me that I would point to the definition in - I-D.irtf-panrg-questions in what-not-to-do, rather than repeat the working definition in what-not-to-do.
>
> It seemed right to me that the reference to  I-D.irtf-panrg-questions would be normative, so that's what I did.
>
> ANOTHER way of doing this, is repeating the definition from  I-D.irtf-panrg-questions in what-not-to-do, with an informative reference to  I-D.irtf-panrg-questions.
>

I believe we shall decide the fate of  I-D.irtf-panrg-questions first
(see another thread, where Med expressed some objections to publishing
that draft as an RFC).
I'd suggest deferring any actions on what-not-to-do for now -
hopefully we can sort the dependencies out as soon as possible.

-- 
SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry