Subject: [apps-discuss] Publication request for draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc5451bis-04

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 16:15:49 -0700

Hi Barry,

The Appsawg requests publication of 
draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc5451bis-04.  The Document Shepherd Write-Up is below.

1. Summary

    The document shepherd is S. Moonesamy.  The Responsible Area Director is
    Barry Leiba.

    draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc5451bis specifies a header field 
(Authentication-Results)
    for use with electronic mail messages to indicate the results of message
    authentication efforts.  RFC 5451 was published as a Proposed Standard in
    April 2009.  draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc5451bis incorporates RFC 5451 and its
    errata and RFC 6577 (Authentication-Results Registration Update).  The
    intended status is Internet Standard as there are seven implementations
    of the specification and it has gained significant deployment.

2. Review and Consensus

    The document was discussed by five participants within the Applications
    Area Working Group and it has the consensus of the working group.  The
    issues raised during the WGLC were resolved quickly.

3. Intellectual Property

    There isn't any IPR disclosure referencing this document.  The author has
    confirmed that the document is in full conformance with BCP 78 and BCP 79.

4. Other points

    The document obsoletes RFC 5451 and RFC 6577.

    The "CFWS" mentioned in idnits is not a missing reference.  The 
informational
    reference to RFC 4870 is intentional.

    RFC 2045 and RFC 5321 are downward references.  RFC 5322 is 
already listed in
    the DOWNREF registry.

    A designated expert will have to be appointed by the IESG for the "Email
    Authentication Method Name" and "Email Authentication Result 
Name" registries.
    The allocation procedures and polices are clearly mentioned in 
Section 6.2 and
    Section 6.3.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy (as document shepherd)

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 16:30:03 -0700

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 4:15 PM, S Moonesamy <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hi Barry,
>
> The Appsawg requests publication of draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc5451bis-**04.
>  The Document Shepherd Write-Up is below.
>

Datatracker updated.  Thanks for shepherding, SM.

>    The document obsoletes RFC 5451 and RFC 6577.

This isn't explicitly called out in the Introduction or Abstract.  In
previous conversations here about another document, a few people opined
that having it stated there as well as in the first page header was a silly
practice, and I don't remember anyone insisting on it, so I've left it out
here.  We can add it in during IETF LC or such if there's strong objection
to its omission.  Clearly though, RFC5451 is obsoleted because it is the
previous version of this document, and RFC6577 is obsoleted because it was
effectively an erratum against RFC5451 that required an IANA action to
fix.  This latter thing is called out in the "Changes Since" section at the
end.

>
>    RFC 2045 and RFC 5321 are downward references.  RFC 5322 is already
> listed in
>    the DOWNREF registry.
>

A question about this: If this document is going for Internet Standard
status, is a normative reference to a Proposed Standard considered a
downward reference even though both are standards track documents?  The RFC
that talks about downward references seems to talk a lot about standards
track documents referencing Informational, Experimental or HIstoric
documents, but not to references within the standards track.

-MSK