headers
Randy Presuhn | 2 Jun 07:45
Picon

Re: Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3)

Hi -

> From: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst <at> it.aoyama.ac.jp>
> To: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer <at> nic.fr>
> Cc: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru <at> ietf.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 2:25 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Issue #50: Change registry format to XML (Apps #3)
>
> [co-chair hat on]
>
> I conclude that there is consensus in the WG to not change anything in
> draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis for this issue. The WG has discussed this issue
> already, and a wide variety of reasons has been given for why a change
> to an XML-based format at this point would be a bad idea.
...

Ok, I've recorded the closure of this issue in the tracker.
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/trac/ticket/50#comment:1

Randy
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Randy Presuhn | 2 Jun 07:50
Picon

Re: Issue #48 Hosting of mailing list (Apps #1)

Hi -

> From: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst <at> it.aoyama.ac.jp>
> To: "Peter Constable" <petercon <at> microsoft.com>
> Cc: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn <at> mindspring.com>; "LTRU Working Group" <ltru <at> ietf.org>; "Alexey Melnikov"
<alexey.melnikov <at> isode.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 2:21 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Issue #48 Hosting of mailing list (Apps #1)
>
> [co-chair hat on]
>
> I conclude that there is consensus in the WG to not change anything in
> draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis, as the current arrangements for mailing lists
> including a third party are working well.
>
> Regards,   Martin.
>
> P.S.: Randy, as before, can you please close the issues in the tracker
> when you get back from your trip? Thanks a lot.

Done.  Closed ticket is available at
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/trac/ticket/48

Randy
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Randy Presuhn | 2 Jun 07:56
Picon

http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/> ?

Hi -

> From: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst <at> it.aoyama.ac.jp>
> To: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer <at> nic.fr>
> Cc: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn <at> mindspring.com>; "LTRU Working Group" <ltru <at> ietf.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 1:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Can a WG member update <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/> ? (Was: Issue #49:
Add reference to RFC 5198
(Apps #2)
>
> I guess Randy should be able to answer this question, but he's away.
> I haven't been able to get a grip on this tracker myself, so for me, the
> question is more "can anybody except Randy handle this" rather than "can
> ordinary WG members update issues". But that may simply be a bilateral
> problem between me and this tracker.

You can, but only if you can log in (using the hard-to-see "login" link
near the upper right corner of the trouble ticket pages) and if your
account has been granted persmission to add/modify entries.

I think only Martin and I are supposed to have been given
those permissions for the ltru database.

Randy
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Randy Presuhn | 2 Jun 07:59
Picon

Re: Issue #49: Add reference to RFC 5198 (Apps #2)

Hi -

> From: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst <at> it.aoyama.ac.jp>
> To: "Peter Constable" <petercon <at> microsoft.com>
> Cc: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru <at> ietf.org>; "Doug Ewell" <doug <at> ewellic.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 2:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Issue #49: Add reference to RFC 5198 (Apps #2)
>
> [co-chair hat on]
>
> I conclude that there is consensus in the WG to not change anything in
> draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis for this issue, as argued for by various
> contributors in this thread.

Ok, http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/trac/ticket/49
is now closed with a "won't fix" status.

Randy

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Randy Presuhn | 2 Jun 08:02
Picon

Re: Issue #51: MAY in 2.2.4 (E) on Channel Islands (Apps #4)

Hi -

> From: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst <at> it.aoyama.ac.jp>
> To: "Peter Constable" <petercon <at> microsoft.com>
> Cc: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru <at> ietf.org>; "Doug Ewell" <doug <at> ewellic.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 2:29 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Issue #51: MAY in 2.2.4 (E) on Channel Islands (Apps #4)
>
> [co-chair hat on]
>
> I conclude that there is consensus in the WG to not change anything in
> draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis for this issue. The MAY appropriately reflects
> the fact that this registration is possible (as long as the conditions
> continue to hold), but it is not made currently because nobody currently
> sees a need for it.

Ok, I've marked the issue "closed" with a "won't fix" status in
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/trac/ticket/51

Randy

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Randy Presuhn | 2 Jun 08:05
Picon

Re: Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5)

Hi -

> From: "Phillips, Addison" <addison <at> amazon.com>
> To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst <at> it.aoyama.ac.jp>; "PeterConstable" <petercon <at> microsoft.com>
> Cc: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru <at> ietf.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 8:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Issue #52: Delete reference to RFC 2860 (Apps #5)
>
> (editor hat on)
>
> I have opened a new editor's copy (draft-23) and removed all reference to RFC 2860 in that document.
...

I've updated the ticket as "fixed"
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/trac/ticket/52

Randy

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Randy Presuhn | 2 Jun 08:11
Picon

Re: Issue #54: section 3.7 requirements on maintainers of additional registries (Apps #7)

Hi -

In accordance with the preceding discussion on this thread,
I've closed this ticket with a "won't fix" status, and
included extracts of Martin's wrap-up in the ticket.

http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/trac/ticket/54

Randy
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Randy Presuhn | 2 Jun 08:20
Picon

Re: Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available

Hi -

> From: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst <at> it.aoyama.ac.jp>
> To: "CE Whitehead" <cewcathar <at> hotmail.com>
> Cc: <ltru <at> ietf.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 3:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available
>
> [co-chair hat on]
>
> This is the last comment on issue #45
> (http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/trac/ticket/45) that I have found.
>
> Although further suggestions for minor "improvements" have been made,
> nobody has expressed strong disagreement for the current text on this
> issue in draft-22
> (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-22#section-4.5).
>
> I therefore conclude that the text in draft-22 represents WG consensus
> on this issue.
...

Ok, I've marked it "closed" in the tracker, and included
the resolution text in the ticket.
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ltru/trac/ticket/45

Randy
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Randy Presuhn | 2 Jun 08:27
Picon

Ticket #53 resolution?

Hi -

> From: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst <at> it.aoyama.ac.jp>
> To: "CE Whitehead" <cewcathar <at> hotmail.com>
> Cc: <ltru <at> ietf.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 3:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available
...
> With this, I think I have declared consensus on all the open issues, and
> these issues all can be closed. Two of them, if I count correctly,
> require editorial action. I would like to ask the editors to prepare an
> updated copy, ready for submission at my instruction.
...

There was a flurry of commentary after you announced consensus on #53.
The editors seem to have gone with a different text, so I have left this
one open until I get some clarification.

Randy
Permalink | Reply | 8 comments |
headers
Peter Constable | 3 Jun 20:38
Picon
Favicon

Re: Ticket #53 resolution?

Addison or others: is there a response to Randy's question? Can we get some traction to close on this?

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: ltru-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf Of Randy Presuhn
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 11:28 PM
To: ltru <at> ietf.org
Subject: [Ltru] Ticket #53 resolution?

Hi -

> From: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst <at> it.aoyama.ac.jp>
> To: "CE Whitehead" <cewcathar <at> hotmail.com>
> Cc: <ltru <at> ietf.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 3:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available
...
> With this, I think I have declared consensus on all the open issues, and
> these issues all can be closed. Two of them, if I count correctly,
> require editorial action. I would like to ask the editors to prepare an
> updated copy, ready for submission at my instruction.
...

There was a flurry of commentary after you announced consensus on #53.
The editors seem to have gone with a different text, so I have left this
one open until I get some clarification.

Randy
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |

Gmane