From nobody Mon Feb 3 14:01:13 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB91C12090D for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 14:01:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.989 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.989 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=krose.org Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SkuxKeJujJ07 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 14:01:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yw1-xc34.google.com (mail-yw1-xc34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8ADF120133 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 14:01:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yw1-xc34.google.com with SMTP id h126so15565669ywc.6 for ; Mon, 03 Feb 2020 14:01:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=krose.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Y9RAHxxNluLPL02VxoQzWTV0CoqbLHi4hW/TBhzXSJg=; b=QxSmtzT20wyvteOFKLigOhAWmdIhJf6mJLYzUK98zPEGIM2Q60Aj9EXy1YyQSYWdjN NWZDYAICekSqbsQY0cBdKYajStBwfgMJpGfFNxb7f4bsUPlksf2W7li7uEaV6jkpSUZg NpTlwBsjPsBqSEEtwFu454kK3T6fBW0CxPii8= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Y9RAHxxNluLPL02VxoQzWTV0CoqbLHi4hW/TBhzXSJg=; b=Ctt5dJKHBe6s4NIvdtsm4ppTMrOngEc5YPJWBTUNvRGGBi2h1e0Oz6D/fxyn3hCZmq xOEmVFhvgb4os8aYNZith7cT++bzy4OqIHJiLjR2Eb7NocFGcI5GWu6ZTM7u2CCeX456 F87IUplgMg2emzQyvZ13ilJoo9d8Dz0DL5jwte+62Ln575XgaBSHV0jR5VumT7FQouXk z+MIsyjrNgaC4eAgEb42aI1OW4ELYdFqMHw79231ifaBiBRIQmEtsEAEjscIppEXRu6/ eyzD9r+3ZNEraZthtxE0rSnzMzjL1jeKQih/B17PXqTlsjshWKqtd9dO/Tc7+rBBIgqN +P6A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUWDM/goqbT+N75+qK4duarbu3dH8CdRJpcbOqlXrRTIbK+BfKo xsRo140Tbyo93Rt6sDpsskyv7uGzQJAvzAwcnWefaA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwQS42Q+JVk4fENUpyo0QWLU6CDVOgwC4APQuS3zni/r7mzj494/6G/5gEp5CnNwYvTiPXs9LE63H4FxeoNjSo= X-Received: by 2002:a25:eb0f:: with SMTP id d15mr20223230ybs.247.1580767266431; Mon, 03 Feb 2020 14:01:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Kyle Rose Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 17:00:55 -0500 Message-ID: To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF Cc: Leslie Daigle , Matt Stock , mops@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006377df059db30fa5" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Mops] Confirming adoption consensus Re: draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2020 22:01:12 -0000 --0000000000006377df059db30fa5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'll look into the right way to set this up. I'm not sure that the QUIC single-repo model makes sense here, but one or more official MOPS repos for adopted docs seems like a good idea. Kyle On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 1:17 PM Spencer Dawkins at IETF < spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, Leslie, > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 11:34 AM Leslie Daigle > wrote: > >> That=E2=80=99s a fair question. >> >> IMO, if people are generally interested in using GitHub for docs in this >> WG, we should. Kyle? >> >> There seems to be some leaning that way, given Jake & Ali=E2=80=99s use = so far, >> but I, at least, would like to hear from others to know whether the >> interest in using GitHub for documents extends beyond the authors of tha= t >> particular document? >> > I certainly am (I have a PR waiting for that particular document now, but > I don't know why we would not want to use Github for other docs). > > I'd also note that Ali has at least a few issues in Jake's repository now= , > and I've been waiting to see if the repository would change upon adoption > before adding issues of my own. > > Best, > > Spencer > >> Leslie. >> >> On 30 Jan 2020, at 16:51, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: >> >> Since we seem to be getting "support" e-mail and the 31st is tomorrow, i= s >> it too early to ask if the working group will have its own repository fo= r >> working group drafts? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Spencer >> >> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:25 PM Matt Stock wrote: >> >>> I support the adoption of the draft. >>> >>> Matt >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:45 PM Leslie Daigle >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks, Jake, for putting together the follow ups from the IETF 106 >>>> MOPS meeting. >>>> >>>> I=E2=80=99m happy to see others have already started chiming in with c= omments. >>>> >>>> We had pretty strong consensus in the room to take this on as a WG >>>> item, and I=E2=80=99m happy to formally follow that up on the list her= e and now. >>>> >>>> If anyone *objects* to adoption of the document ( >>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01), please >>>> share your objection now. >>>> >>>> If there is no (unresolved) objection by the end of January 31, 2020, >>>> we will adopt this document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons ... >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Leslie. >>>> >>>> On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:26, Holland, Jake wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Mops, >>>> >>>> I'm finally writing to follow up on draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy. >>>> >>>> I did a quick review of the video from the IETF 106 mops meeting: >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D4_k340xT2jM >>>> >>>> I captured the comments I heard in a new notes section and >>>> updated the draft to -01, plus a few very minor editing tweaks. >>>> I was going to rename it to draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons, but >>>> I thought I'd wait until after the adoption call, to make sure it's >>>> confirmed on-list. (I think the data tracker is easier to use when >>>> you change names less often...) >>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01 >>>> >>>> I also wanted to say thanks to the folks who volunteered to co-author >>>> this draft. You 3 are BCC'd, and your contributions are very welcome. >>>> >>>> I also wanted to ask whether there's any particular topics you'll be >>>> working on, so we don't get multiple people writing to the same points= ? >>>> >>>> Regardless, for the moment the current version is here and I'm >>>> accepting pull requests :) : >>>> https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts >>>> >>>> Assuming the adoption call starts soon and is successful, we maybe >>>> should move to a WG-owned repo, but that's where it is for now. >>>> >>>> Thanks and regards, >>>> Jake >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Mops mailing list >>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Leslie Daigle >>>> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises >>>> ldaigle@thinkingcat.com >>>> -- >>>> Mops mailing list >>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> [image: Limelight Networks] >>> Matt Stock* Principal Architect* >>> EXPERIENCE FIRST. >>> +1 716 949 0332 <+1+716+949+0332> >>> www.limelight.com >>> [image: Facebook] [image: >>> LinkedIn] [image: >>> Twitter] >>> >>> -- >>> Mops mailing list >>> Mops@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>> >> -- >> Mops mailing list >> Mops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >> >> -- >> ------------------------------ >> >> Leslie Daigle >> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises >> ldaigle@thinkingcat.com >> > --0000000000006377df059db30fa5 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'll look into the right way to set this up. I= 9;m not sure that the QUIC single-repo model makes sense here, but one or m= ore official MOPS repos for adopted docs seems like a good idea.
=
Kyle

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 1:17 PM Spencer Dawki= ns at IETF <spencerdawk= ins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi, Leslie,=C2=A0
=
On Fri= , Jan 31, 2020 at 11:34 AM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com> wrote:

That=E2=80=99s a fair question.

IMO, if people are generally interested in using GitHub for= docs in this WG, we should. Kyle?

There seems to be some leaning that way, given Jake & A= li=E2=80=99s use so far, but I, at least, would like to hear from others to= know whether the interest in using GitHub for documents extends beyond the= authors of that particular document?

I certainly am (I have a PR waiting for that particular document now, but= I don't know why we would not want to use Github for other docs).=C2= =A0

I'd also note that Ali has at least a few = issues in Jake's repository now, and I've been waiting to see if th= e repository would change upon adoption before adding issues of my own.

Best,

Spencer=C2=A0

Leslie.

On 30 Jan 2020, at 16:51, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:

<= div dir=3D"ltr">Since we seem to be getting "support" e-mail and = the 31st is tomorrow, is it too early to ask if the working group will have= its own repository for working group drafts?

Thanks,

Spencer

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:25 PM Matt St= ock <mstock@llnw.co= m> wrote:
I support the adoption of the draft.

M= att


On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:45 PM Leslie Daigle <<= a href=3D"mailto:ldaigle@thinkingcat.com" target=3D"_blank">ldaigle@thinkin= gcat.com> wrote:

Thanks, Jake, for putting together the follow ups from the = IETF 106 MOPS meeting.

I=E2=80=99m happy to see others have already started chimin= g in with comments.

We had pretty strong consensus in the room to take this on = as a WG item, and I=E2=80=99m happy to formally follow that up on the list = here and now.

If anyone objects to adoption of the document (https://tools.ietf.org/html/dr= aft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01), please share your objection now.

If there is no (unresolved) objection by the end of January= 31, 2020, we will adopt this document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons = ...

Thanks,
Leslie.

On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:26, Holland, Jake wrote:

Hi Mops,

I'm finally writing to follow up on draft-jholland-mops= -taxonomy.

I did a quick review of the video from the IETF 106 mops me= eting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D4_k340x= T2jM

I captured the comments I heard in a new notes section and<= br> updated the draft to -01, plus a few very minor editing tweaks.
I was going to rename it to draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons, but
I thought I'd wait until after the adoption call, to make sure it's=
confirmed on-list. (I think the data tracker is easier to use when
you change names less often...)
https://tools.ietf.org/html= /draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01

I also wanted to say thanks to the folks who volunteered to= co-author
this draft. You 3 are BCC'd, and your contributions are very welcome.<= /p>

I also wanted to ask whether there's any particular top= ics you'll be
working on, so we don't get multiple people writing to the same points?=

Regardless, for the moment the current version is here and = I'm
accepting pull requests :) :
https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ie= tf-mops-drafts

Assuming the adoption call starts soon and is successful, w= e maybe
should move to a WG-owned repo, but that's where it is for now.

Thanks and regards,
Jake

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises

ldaigle@thinkingcat.com=

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops


--
3D"Limelight=
Matt Stock=C2=A0Principal Architect
EXPERIENCE FIRST.
+1 716 949 0332
www.limelight.= com
3D"Facebook"3D"LinkedIn"3D"Twitter"


--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops
--0000000000006377df059db30fa5-- From nobody Mon Feb 3 18:27:34 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5C9412004A for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 18:27:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.987 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.987 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ufTS5R4r7o8T for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 18:27:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf1-x12b.google.com (mail-lf1-x12b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 608E612004D for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 18:27:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id b15so11147731lfc.4 for ; Mon, 03 Feb 2020 18:27:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0wl+1BOpCABNbaRbnFL4VGOVc91UI0Kc+rFragv/ZtY=; b=j7UtVhHN1sUU6MX9a+/KBRco+AzbtXVByEj/DGBGfumgayzomKZ9Kp0wYGbcfhmlUv wL6Os0SBpIRdAMzOXDHuWv+lVoutEYj+9jPEAQHAeoyiZcbRLbskpyb6il56pQvz9L9l 6Sr19P/Y5YCkRi12GPQpE6P1c5IKOvFbek4SnVkhyYundr2YUCcy1PQfAh8BCTMMMP2/ 7KOfce4LH3MfAox0aL55A6nCnRoybTifcOm3bzsSigQu9g9n1w+tQNBKISwjB81Iz90e sgrrzPaXCVkMix2bJErdZOcxY6pq1ketkcwM/c8bFjsbzW3xMfJIv3Z73fDeH/ucOffY /F+g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0wl+1BOpCABNbaRbnFL4VGOVc91UI0Kc+rFragv/ZtY=; b=a15d4Xw6WwiE4b0kKaojhKdAtBfLvpAw1gzWm03Fz6H4Z+4eZNcT8qaiyvmLbGZbCf NDPK7IExB5Wj3cp9935mSTNEnmwd1AME6D9ONGnXglbObTKNO+xJWBDUtamouG37mNdJ ZCDT7JnFvrbed5u+46PJ7+X/MaJ8C5GQEFI4XNcvz4DNywbwYazKOKxnq/aABeI6APuO ryYUMYUYPpJJWguB/iuydLyUfcAnuRMLHxfFUyi8tc1kUJlrZ6HhJYcXYJyZxjSno/VL ig5TTty8xniIOOeABdnUlkROW8vCJv9BexKVvaAx8mGbekimFFHPnEqFlGS5pMsj5d0K Ga6w== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWK45umjRQ6/cD9jqRVZpiQCn/H+SBb5Wb5kfmyfNWAMtLm2FrT tLg7Vgk9TcYOZIKFj9OYUb2DUBBBA4yj4mQKwxw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxiaMNMgp1SCauJG1PUElFvMt0HVsYV9QY1heEKrOPyKrss6OKegMc5+vQ20Y+ukIHDOiULh6VDTm94vm0oaDE= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5e29:: with SMTP id o9mr13552741lfg.81.1580783247533; Mon, 03 Feb 2020 18:27:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:27:01 -0600 Message-ID: To: Kyle Rose Cc: Leslie Daigle , Matt Stock , mops@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000efab9c059db6c7f2" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Mops] Confirming adoption consensus Re: draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 02:27:33 -0000 --000000000000efab9c059db6c7f2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Kyle, On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 4:01 PM Kyle Rose wrote: > I'll look into the right way to set this up. I'm not sure that the QUIC > single-repo model makes sense here, but one or more official MOPS repos f= or > adopted docs seems like a good idea. > I'm certainly not the genius of Github at IETF, but I'd tend to agree - the MOPS documents aren't likely to have the same tight linkages and intersecting participant lists that the QUIC core protocol specifications do. I'm recently co-chair of CELLAR, and that working group uses 4 repos (see https://github.com/cellar-wg for details). Best, Spencer > > Kyle > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 1:17 PM Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, Leslie, >> >> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 11:34 AM Leslie Daigle >> wrote: >> >>> That=E2=80=99s a fair question. >>> >>> IMO, if people are generally interested in using GitHub for docs in thi= s >>> WG, we should. Kyle? >>> >>> There seems to be some leaning that way, given Jake & Ali=E2=80=99s use= so far, >>> but I, at least, would like to hear from others to know whether the >>> interest in using GitHub for documents extends beyond the authors of th= at >>> particular document? >>> >> I certainly am (I have a PR waiting for that particular document now, bu= t >> I don't know why we would not want to use Github for other docs). >> >> I'd also note that Ali has at least a few issues in Jake's repository >> now, and I've been waiting to see if the repository would change upon >> adoption before adding issues of my own. >> >> Best, >> >> Spencer >> >>> Leslie. >>> >>> On 30 Jan 2020, at 16:51, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: >>> >>> Since we seem to be getting "support" e-mail and the 31st is tomorrow, >>> is it too early to ask if the working group will have its own repositor= y >>> for working group drafts? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Spencer >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:25 PM Matt Stock wrote: >>> >>>> I support the adoption of the draft. >>>> >>>> Matt >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:45 PM Leslie Daigle >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks, Jake, for putting together the follow ups from the IETF 106 >>>>> MOPS meeting. >>>>> >>>>> I=E2=80=99m happy to see others have already started chiming in with = comments. >>>>> >>>>> We had pretty strong consensus in the room to take this on as a WG >>>>> item, and I=E2=80=99m happy to formally follow that up on the list he= re and now. >>>>> >>>>> If anyone *objects* to adoption of the document ( >>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01), please >>>>> share your objection now. >>>>> >>>>> If there is no (unresolved) objection by the end of January 31, 2020, >>>>> we will adopt this document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons ... >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Leslie. >>>>> >>>>> On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:26, Holland, Jake wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Mops, >>>>> >>>>> I'm finally writing to follow up on draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy. >>>>> >>>>> I did a quick review of the video from the IETF 106 mops meeting: >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D4_k340xT2jM >>>>> >>>>> I captured the comments I heard in a new notes section and >>>>> updated the draft to -01, plus a few very minor editing tweaks. >>>>> I was going to rename it to draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons, but >>>>> I thought I'd wait until after the adoption call, to make sure it's >>>>> confirmed on-list. (I think the data tracker is easier to use when >>>>> you change names less often...) >>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01 >>>>> >>>>> I also wanted to say thanks to the folks who volunteered to co-author >>>>> this draft. You 3 are BCC'd, and your contributions are very welcome. >>>>> >>>>> I also wanted to ask whether there's any particular topics you'll be >>>>> working on, so we don't get multiple people writing to the same point= s? >>>>> >>>>> Regardless, for the moment the current version is here and I'm >>>>> accepting pull requests :) : >>>>> https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts >>>>> >>>>> Assuming the adoption call starts soon and is successful, we maybe >>>>> should move to a WG-owned repo, but that's where it is for now. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks and regards, >>>>> Jake >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Mops mailing list >>>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> Leslie Daigle >>>>> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises >>>>> ldaigle@thinkingcat.com >>>>> -- >>>>> Mops mailing list >>>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> [image: Limelight Networks] >>>> Matt Stock* Principal Architect* >>>> EXPERIENCE FIRST. >>>> +1 716 949 0332 <+1+716+949+0332> >>>> www.limelight.com >>>> [image: Facebook] [image: >>>> LinkedIn] [image: >>>> Twitter] >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Mops mailing list >>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>> >>> -- >>> Mops mailing list >>> Mops@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>> >>> -- >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Leslie Daigle >>> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises >>> ldaigle@thinkingcat.com >>> >> --000000000000efab9c059db6c7f2 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, Kyle,=C2=A0
On Mon, F= eb 3, 2020 at 4:01 PM Kyle Rose <kros= e@krose.org> wrote:
= I'll look into the right way to set this up. I'm not sure that the = QUIC single-repo model makes sense here, but one or more official MOPS repo= s for adopted docs seems like a good idea.
I'm certainly not the genius of Github at IETF, but I'd= tend to agree - the MOPS documents aren't likely to have the same tigh= t linkages and intersecting participant lists that the QUIC core protocol s= pecifications do. I'm recently co-chair of CELLAR, and that working gro= up uses 4 repos (see=C2=A0https://= github.com/cellar-wg for details).=C2=A0

Best,=

Spencer
=C2=A0
=

Kyle

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at = 1:17 PM Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi, Leslie,=C2=A0=

= On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 11:34 AM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com> wrote:=

That=E2=80=99s a fair question.

IMO, if people are generally interested in using GitHub for= docs in this WG, we should. Kyle?

There seems to be some leaning that way, given Jake & A= li=E2=80=99s use so far, but I, at least, would like to hear from others to= know whether the interest in using GitHub for documents extends beyond the= authors of that particular document?

I certainly am (I have a PR waiting for that particular document now, but= I don't know why we would not want to use Github for other docs).=C2= =A0

I'd also note that Ali has at least a few = issues in Jake's repository now, and I've been waiting to see if th= e repository would change upon adoption before adding issues of my own.

Best,

Spencer=C2=A0

Leslie.

On 30 Jan 2020, at 16:51, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:

Since we seem to be getting "support" e-mail and the 3= 1st is tomorrow, is it too early to ask if the working group will have its = own repository for working group drafts?

Thanks,

Spencer

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:25 PM Matt Stock &= lt;mstock@llnw.com= > wrote:
I support the adopti= on of the draft.

Matt


On Tue, Jan 21= , 2020 at 2:45 PM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com> wrote:

Thanks, Jake, for putting together the follow ups from the = IETF 106 MOPS meeting.

I=E2=80=99m happy to see others have already started chimin= g in with comments.

We had pretty strong consensus in the room to take this on = as a WG item, and I=E2=80=99m happy to formally follow that up on the list = here and now.

If anyone objects to adoption of the document (https://tools.ietf.org/html/dra= ft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01), please share your objection now.

If there is no (unresolved) objection by the end of January= 31, 2020, we will adopt this document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons = ...

Thanks,
Leslie.

On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:26, Holland, Jake wrote:

Hi Mops,

I'm finally writing to follow up on draft-jholland-mops= -taxonomy.

I did a quick review of the video from the IETF 106 mops me= eting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D4_k340x= T2jM

I captured the comments I heard in a new notes section and<= br> updated the draft to -01, plus a few very minor editing tweaks.
I was going to rename it to draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons, but
I thought I'd wait until after the adoption call, to make sure it's=
confirmed on-list. (I think the data tracker is easier to use when
you change names less often...)
https://tools.ietf.org/html= /draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01

I also wanted to say thanks to the folks who volunteered to= co-author
this draft. You 3 are BCC'd, and your contributions are very welcome.<= /p>

I also wanted to ask whether there's any particular top= ics you'll be
working on, so we don't get multiple people writing to the same points?=

Regardless, for the moment the current version is here and = I'm
accepting pull requests :) :
https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ie= tf-mops-drafts

Assuming the adoption call starts soon and is successful, w= e maybe
should move to a WG-owned repo, but that's where it is for now.

Thanks and regards,
Jake

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises

ldaigle@thinkingcat.com=

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops


--
3D"Limelight
Matt Stock=C2=A0Principal Architect=
EXPERIENCE FIRST.
+1 716 949 0332
www.limelight.com
3D"Facebook"<= a style=3D"margin-left:3px" href=3D"https://www.linkedin.com/company/limeli= ght-networks" target=3D"_blank">3D"Link=3D"Twitter=


--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops
--000000000000efab9c059db6c7f2-- From nobody Mon Feb 3 20:35:45 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BFEE120052 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:35:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=thinkingcat.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CTYRUHnlFQsA for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:35:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from bonobo.birch.relay.mailchannels.net (bonobo.birch.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.209.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B657212004D for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:35:41 -0800 (PST) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A262120228; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 04:35:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-18-5.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.18.5]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id EC83D120068; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 04:35:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com ([TEMPUNAVAIL]. [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.5); Tue, 04 Feb 2020 04:35:40 +0000 X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Obese-Sponge: 3d5db1e85791db3a_1580790940421_3268983629 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1580790940421:2843563411 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1580790940421 Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98DA180102; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:35:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=thinkingcat.com; h=from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=thinkingcat.com; bh=rEFvAgk2nMQRik /8mZFRkGq3lQs=; b=G3OZO8ZAMAeYFd3o3kK2Ij8qGIBOfystT3P5o7d7TvN/PZ WpXYVm+PT7zmLkwjvNJFZtgj7EtvL2TcAOQgHGm9lhbag5VVJZfwynrwcLOyktRt 5vyweCFRvy1oA4AMG6LBT+2M+qsJbwe+jxUBhoeazKz3LuI/08U7ZGiAjjxW4= Received: from [10.0.4.234] (wsip-70-183-83-206.sd.sd.cox.net [70.183.83.206]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ldaigle@thinkingcat.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E860B800FA; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:35:31 -0800 (PST) X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a84 From: "Leslie Daigle" To: mops@ietf.org Cc: "Kyle Rose" , "Holland, Jake" Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2020 23:35:11 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671) Message-ID: <21623E16-6532-4AD5-911D-B5C6E57D3256@thinkingcat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_4656739A-A907-460D-9A1E-5C12604C6BC9_=" X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK X-VR-OUT-SCORE: -100 X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrgeekgdejvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfftffgtefojffquffvnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpefhvffufffokfggtgfgsegrkehmreertdejnecuhfhrohhmpedfnfgvshhlihgvucffrghighhlvgdfuceolhgurghighhlvgesthhhihhnkhhinhhgtggrthdrtghomheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghdphihouhhtuhgsvgdrtghomhdpghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecukfhppeejtddrudekfedrkeefrddvtdeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhppdhhvghloheplgdutddrtddrgedrvdefgegnpdhinhgvthepjedtrddukeefrdekfedrvddtiedprhgvthhurhhnqdhprghthhepfdfnvghslhhivgcuffgrihhglhgvfdcuoehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmqedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmpdhnrhgtphhtthhopehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhm Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: [Mops] Confirmed! Re: Confirming adoption consensus Re: draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 04:35:44 -0000 --=_MailMate_4656739A-A907-460D-9A1E-5C12604C6BC9_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed; markup=markdown Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Having heard support for, and no dissent, I take this as consensus that=20 the WG is adopting the document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons . Thanks, Leslie. On 21 Jan 2020, at 14:45, Leslie Daigle wrote: > Thanks, Jake, for putting together the follow ups from the IETF 106=20 > MOPS meeting. > > I=E2=80=99m happy to see others have already started chiming in with=20 > comments. > > We had pretty strong consensus in the room to take this on as a WG=20 > item, and I=E2=80=99m happy to formally follow that up on the list here= and=20 > now.. > > If anyone _objects_ to adoption of the document=20 > (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01), please=20 > share your objection now. > > If there is no (unresolved) objection by the end of January 31, 2020,=20 > we will adopt this document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons . > > Thanks, > Leslie. > > > On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:26, Holland, Jake wrote: > >> Hi Mops, >> >> I'm finally writing to follow up on draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy. >> >> I did a quick review of the video from the IETF 106 mops meeting: >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D4_k340xT2jM >> >> I captured the comments I heard in a new notes section and >> updated the draft to -01, plus a few very minor editing tweaks. >> I was going to rename it to draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons, but >> I thought I'd wait until after the adoption call, to make sure it's >> confirmed on-list. (I think the data tracker is easier to use when >> you change names less often...) >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01 >> >> I also wanted to say thanks to the folks who volunteered to co-author >> this draft. You 3 are BCC'd, and your contributions are very=20 >> welcome. >> >> I also wanted to ask whether there's any particular topics you'll be >> working on, so we don't get multiple people writing to the same=20 >> points? >> >> Regardless, for the moment the current version is here and I'm >> accepting pull requests :) : >> https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts >> >> Assuming the adoption call starts soon and is successful, we maybe >> should move to a WG-owned repo, but that's where it is for now. >> >> Thanks and regards, >> Jake >> >> >> --=20 >> Mops mailing list >> Mops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops > > > --=20 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Leslie Daigle > Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises > ldaigle@thinkingcat.com > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > --=20 > Mops mailing list > Mops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops --=20 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Leslie Daigle Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises ldaigle@thinkingcat.com ------------------------------------------------------------------- --=_MailMate_4656739A-A907-460D-9A1E-5C12604C6BC9_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Having heard support for, and no dissent, I take this as= consensus that the WG is adopting the document as draft-ietf-mops-stream= ing-opcons .

Thanks,

Leslie.

On 21 Jan 2020, at 14:45, Leslie Daigle wrote:

Thanks, Jake, for putting together the follow ups from th= e IETF 106 MOPS meeting.

I=E2=80=99m happy to see others have already started chim= ing in with comments.

We had pretty strong consensus in the room to take this o= n as a WG item, and I=E2=80=99m happy to formally follow that up on the l= ist here and now..

If anyone objects to adoption of the document (<= a href=3D"https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01" st= yle=3D"color:#777">https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxono= my-01), please share your objection now.

If there is no (unresolved) objection by the end of Janua= ry 31, 2020, we will adopt this document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opc= ons .

Thanks,
Leslie.

On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:26, Holland, Jake wrote:

Hi Mops,

I'm finally writing to follow up on draft-jholland-mops-t= axonomy.

I did a quick review of the video from the IETF 106 mops = meeting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D4_k340xT2jM

I captured the comments I heard in a new notes section an= d
updated the draft to -01, plus a few very minor editing tweaks.
I was going to rename it to draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons, but
I thought I'd wait until after the adoption call, to make sure it's
confirmed on-list. (I think the data tracker is easier to use when
you change names less often...)
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxon= omy-01

I also wanted to say thanks to the folks who volunteered = to co-author
this draft. You 3 are BCC'd, and your contributions are very welcome.

I also wanted to ask whether there's any particular topic= s you'll be
working on, so we don't get multiple people writing to the same points?

Regardless, for the moment the current version is here an= d I'm
accepting pull requests :) :
https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts

Assuming the adoption call starts soon and is successful,= we maybe
should move to a WG-owned repo, but that's where it is for now.

Thanks and regards,
Jake

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises

ldaigle@thinkingcat.com

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises

ldaigle@thinkingcat.com

--=_MailMate_4656739A-A907-460D-9A1E-5C12604C6BC9_=-- From nobody Mon Feb 3 20:41:01 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F958120104 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:40:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.988 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.988 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=thinkingcat.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DPf1CokT1I0y for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:40:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from brown.elm.relay.mailchannels.net (brown.elm.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.212.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A15151200FE for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:40:24 -0800 (PST) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9721120F87; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 04:40:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-0-7.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.0.7]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 47740120FCF; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 04:40:22 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com ([TEMPUNAVAIL]. [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.5); Tue, 04 Feb 2020 04:40:23 +0000 X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Macabre-Whimsical: 11d995043ad0c6d8_1580791223313_749707620 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1580791223313:3792873230 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1580791223313 Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C768280102; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:40:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=thinkingcat.com; h=from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=thinkingcat.com; bh=D yiNRr3tQ4FW1eADkuSF//+1vCU=; b=o8t2Mk5jV9JHBksfg902TD8aXPc1kqobE uoqxxBiU/WmmQgRXM5xqa6ctJS5f1JZrDA4sKiLUcZQVRY/IRoQpqjAbC1UwOsbN J8kPiCTyEIgD4lb2ME+TYt+QAdWJUHm8FweUfiMY56rgHDvhv8pYHdol8XiHVTkb D9/TpIkxlc= Received: from [10.0.4.234] (wsip-70-183-83-206.sd.sd.cox.net [70.183.83.206]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ldaigle@thinkingcat.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a84.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BED47800FC; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:40:15 -0800 (PST) X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a84 From: "Leslie Daigle" To: "Spencer Dawkins at IETF" Cc: "Kyle Rose" , "Matt Stock" , mops@ietf.org Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2020 23:39:55 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671) Message-ID: <84629438-89A5-4E41-A80D-0DEAA34394F9@thinkingcat.com> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_18BE036A-E8DB-405A-AE98-3AEFA6251D5D_=" Embedded-HTML: [{"HTML":[802, 12465], "plain":[393, 5552], "uuid":"810EE072-2081-468D-9FAC-0236C1624CC9"}] X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK X-VR-OUT-SCORE: -100 X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrgeekgdejfecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfftffgtefojffquffvnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpefhvffufffokfgjfhggtgfgsegrkehmreertdejnecuhfhrohhmpedfnfgvshhlihgvucffrghighhlvgdfuceolhgurghighhlvgesthhhihhnkhhinhhgtggrthdrtghomheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhdpihgvthhfrdhorhhgpdihohhuthhusggvrdgtohhmpdhlihhmvghlihhghhhtrdgtohhmpdhfrggtvggsohhokhdrtghomhdplhhinhhkvgguihhnrdgtohhmpdhtfihithhtvghrrddrtghomhenucfkphepjedtrddukeefrdekfedrvddtieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhhouggvpehsmhhtphdphhgvlhhopegluddtrddtrdegrddvfeegngdpihhnvghtpeejtddrudekfedrkeefrddvtdeipdhrvghtuhhrnhdqphgrthhhpedfnfgvshhlihgvucffrghighhlvgdfuceolhgurghighhlvgesthhhihhnkhhinhhgtggrthdrtghomheqpdhmrghilhhfrhhomheplhgurghighhlvgesthhhihhnkhhinhhgtggrthdrtghomhdpnhhrtghpthhtoheplhgurghighhlvgesthhhihhnkhhinhhgtggrthdrtghomh Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Mops] Confirming adoption consensus Re: draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 04:40:59 -0000 --=_MailMate_18BE036A-E8DB-405A-AE98-3AEFA6251D5D_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Spencer, One thing I=E2=80=99ve been trying to find out is: how to tie a git repo= to=20 the IETF. Looking at the CELLAR example, it seems like one just makes=20 the assertion that it is the WG git repo? And, it seems odd that there=20 are no visible members, let alone owner, of the git repo? Apologies if I=E2=80=99m missing the obvious. Leslie. On 3 Feb 2020, at 21:27, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: > Hi, Kyle, > > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 4:01 PM Kyle Rose wrote: > >> I'll look into the right way to set this up. I'm not sure that the=20 >> QUIC >> single-repo model makes sense here, but one or more official MOPS=20 >> repos for >> adopted docs seems like a good idea. >> > > I'm certainly not the genius of Github at IETF, but I'd tend to agree=20 > - the > MOPS documents aren't likely to have the same tight linkages and > intersecting participant lists that the QUIC core protocol=20 > specifications > do. I'm recently co-chair of CELLAR, and that working group uses 4=20 > repos > (see https://github.com/cellar-wg for details). > > Best, > > Spencer > > >> >> Kyle >> >> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 1:17 PM Spencer Dawkins at IETF < >> spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, Leslie, >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 11:34 AM Leslie Daigle=20 >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> That=E2=80=99s a fair question. >>>> >>>> IMO, if people are generally interested in using GitHub for docs in=20 >>>> this >>>> WG, we should. Kyle? >>>> >>>> There seems to be some leaning that way, given Jake & Ali=E2=80=99s = use=20 >>>> so far, >>>> but I, at least, would like to hear from others to know whether the >>>> interest in using GitHub for documents extends beyond the authors=20 >>>> of that >>>> particular document? >>>> >>> I certainly am (I have a PR waiting for that particular document=20 >>> now, but >>> I don't know why we would not want to use Github for other docs). >>> >>> I'd also note that Ali has at least a few issues in Jake's=20 >>> repository >>> now, and I've been waiting to see if the repository would change=20 >>> upon >>> adoption before adding issues of my own. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Spencer >>> >>>> Leslie. >>>> >>>> On 30 Jan 2020, at 16:51, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: >>>> >>>> Since we seem to be getting "support" e-mail and the 31st is=20 >>>> tomorrow, >>>> is it too early to ask if the working group will have its own=20 >>>> repository >>>> for working group drafts? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Spencer >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:25 PM Matt Stock wrote: >>>> >>>>> I support the adoption of the draft. >>>>> >>>>> Matt >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:45 PM Leslie Daigle=20 >>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, Jake, for putting together the follow ups from the IETF=20 >>>>>> 106 >>>>>> MOPS meeting. >>>>>> >>>>>> I=E2=80=99m happy to see others have already started chiming in wi= th=20 >>>>>> comments. >>>>>> >>>>>> We had pretty strong consensus in the room to take this on as a=20 >>>>>> WG >>>>>> item, and I=E2=80=99m happy to formally follow that up on the list= here=20 >>>>>> and now. >>>>>> >>>>>> If anyone *objects* to adoption of the document ( >>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01),=20 >>>>>> please >>>>>> share your objection now. >>>>>> >>>>>> If there is no (unresolved) objection by the end of January 31,=20 >>>>>> 2020, >>>>>> we will adopt this document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons=20 >>>>>> ... >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Leslie. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:26, Holland, Jake wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Mops, >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm finally writing to follow up on draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy. >>>>>> >>>>>> I did a quick review of the video from the IETF 106 mops meeting: >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D4_k340xT2jM >>>>>> >>>>>> I captured the comments I heard in a new notes section and >>>>>> updated the draft to -01, plus a few very minor editing tweaks. >>>>>> I was going to rename it to draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons, but >>>>>> I thought I'd wait until after the adoption call, to make sure=20 >>>>>> it's >>>>>> confirmed on-list. (I think the data tracker is easier to use=20 >>>>>> when >>>>>> you change names less often...) >>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01 >>>>>> >>>>>> I also wanted to say thanks to the folks who volunteered to=20 >>>>>> co-author >>>>>> this draft. You 3 are BCC'd, and your contributions are very=20 >>>>>> welcome. >>>>>> >>>>>> I also wanted to ask whether there's any particular topics you'll=20 >>>>>> be >>>>>> working on, so we don't get multiple people writing to the same=20 >>>>>> points? >>>>>> >>>>>> Regardless, for the moment the current version is here and I'm >>>>>> accepting pull requests :) : >>>>>> https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts >>>>>> >>>>>> Assuming the adoption call starts soon and is successful, we=20 >>>>>> maybe >>>>>> should move to a WG-owned repo, but that's where it is for now. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks and regards, >>>>>> Jake >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Mops mailing list >>>>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>> >>>>>> Leslie Daigle >>>>>> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises >>>>>> ldaigle@thinkingcat.com >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Mops mailing list >>>>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> [image: Limelight Networks] >>>>> Matt Stock* Principal Architect* >>>>> EXPERIENCE FIRST. >>>>> +1 716 949 0332 <+1+716+949+0332> >>>>> www.limelight.com >>>>> [image: Facebook]=20 >>>>> [image: >>>>> LinkedIn]=20 >>>>> [image: >>>>> Twitter] >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Mops mailing list >>>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Mops mailing list >>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Leslie Daigle >>>> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises >>>> ldaigle@thinkingcat.com >>>> >>> > --=20 > Mops mailing list > Mops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops --=20 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Leslie Daigle Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises ldaigle@thinkingcat.com ------------------------------------------------------------------- --=_MailMate_18BE036A-E8DB-405A-AE98-3AEFA6251D5D_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Spencer,

One thing I=E2=80=99ve been trying to find out is: how t= o tie a git repo to the IETF. Looking at the CELLAR example, it seems li= ke one just makes the assertion that it is the WG git repo? And, it seem= s odd that there are no visible members, let alone owner, of the git repo= ?

Apologies if I=E2=80=99m missing the obvious.

Leslie.

On 3 Feb 2020, at 21:27, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:

Hi, Kyle,=C2=A0
On Mon,= Feb 3, 2020 at 4:01 PM Kyle Rose <= krose@krose.org> wrote:
I'll look into the right way to set this up. I'm not su= re that the QUIC single-repo model makes sense here, but one or more offi= cial MOPS repos for adopted docs seems like a good idea.

I'm certainly not the genius of Github at= IETF, but I'd tend to agree - the MOPS documents aren't likely t= o have the same tight linkages and intersecting participant lists that th= e QUIC core protocol specifications do. I'm recently co-chair of CELL= AR, and that working group uses 4 repos (see=C2=A0https://github.com/cellar-wg for details).=C2=A0

Best,

Spencer
=C2= =A0

Kyle

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 1:17 PM Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerda= wkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi, Leslie,=C2=A0

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 11:= 34 AM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com> wrote:

That=E2=80=99s a fair question.

IMO, if people are generally interested in using GitHub f= or docs in this WG, we should. Kyle?

There seems to be some leaning that way, given Jake &= Ali=E2=80=99s use so far, but I, at least, would like to hear from other= s to know whether the interest in using GitHub for documents extends beyo= nd the authors of that particular document?

I certainly am (I have a PR waiting for that particular documen= t now, but I don't know why we would not want to use Github for other= docs).=C2=A0

I'd also note that Ali has at = least a few issues in Jake's repository now, and I've been waitin= g to see if the repository would change upon adoption before adding issue= s of my own.

Best,

Spen= cer=C2=A0

Leslie.

On 30 Jan 2020, at 16:51, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:<= /p>

Since we seem to be getting "support" e-mail= and the 31st is tomorrow, is it too early to ask if the working group wi= ll have its own repository for working group drafts?

T= hanks,

Spencer

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:= 25 PM Matt Stock <mstock@llnw.com> wrote:
I support the adoption of the draft.

Matt
<= div>

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:45 PM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat= =2Ecom> wrote:

Thanks, Jake, for putting together the follow ups from th= e IETF 106 MOPS meeting.

I=E2=80=99m happy to see others have already started chim= ing in with comments.

We had pretty strong consensus in the room to take this o= n as a WG item, and I=E2=80=99m happy to formally follow that up on the l= ist here and now.

If anyone objects to adoption of the document (<= a style=3D"color:rgb(57,131,196)" href=3D"https://tools.ietf.org/html/dra= ft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01" target=3D"_blank">https://tools.ietf.org/ht= ml/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01), please share your objection now.=

If there is no (unresolved) objection by the end of Janua= ry 31, 2020, we will adopt this document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opc= ons ....

Thanks,
Leslie.

On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:26, Holland, Jake wrote:

Hi Mops,

I'm finally writing to follow up on draft-jholland-mo= ps-taxonomy.

I did a quick review of the video from the IETF 106 mops = meeting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D4_k= 340xT2jM

I captured the comments I heard in a new notes section an= d
updated the draft to -01, plus a few very minor editing tweaks.
I was going to rename it to draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons, but
I thought I'd wait until after the adoption call, to make sure it'= ;s
confirmed on-list. (I think the data tracker is easier to use when
you change names less often...)
https://tools.ietf.org/= html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01

I also wanted to say thanks to the folks who volunteered = to co-author
this draft. You 3 are BCC'd, and your contributions are very welcome= =2E

I also wanted to ask whether there's any particular t= opics you'll be
working on, so we don't get multiple people writing to the same point= s?

Regardless, for the moment the current version is here an= d I'm
accepting pull requests :) :
https://github.com/GrumpyOldTrol= l/ietf-mops-drafts

Assuming the adoption call starts soon and is successful,= we maybe
should move to a WG-owned repo, but that's where it is for now.

Thanks and regards,
Jake

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mo= ps

--

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises

ldaigle@thinkingcat.com=

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops


--
3D"Limelight
= Matt Stock=C2=A0Principal A= rchitect
EXPERIENCE = FIRST.
+1 716 949= 0332
www.limelight.com
3D"Facebook"3D"LinkedIn"= 3D"Twitter"


--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises

ldaigle@thinkingcat.com=

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises

ldaigle@thinkingcat.com

--=_MailMate_18BE036A-E8DB-405A-AE98-3AEFA6251D5D_=-- From nobody Tue Feb 4 08:04:59 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52155120838 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 08:04:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.987 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.987 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xyhachWcOfzA for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 08:04:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lj1-x233.google.com (mail-lj1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FB8B12082B for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 08:04:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-x233.google.com with SMTP id d10so19164865ljl.9 for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 08:04:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=QU9XeMHju0zeNQ8AWN7Rwg7SmsCSaVz4gKwplxRVHFY=; b=u30+ie3mJXZvGY9mdEva6mT+Dr3VRlqNRHumVER794AKlOk4NciErBwYyV9FTsbFZu rvFIQxHaBXxm4sfqIT+Lx4mVXr/N4k+6xUc3N0HkXTgAGjIxaeaYF05T44I3o3Aw0lSV kb3ICeLXulMdNNvVWVIX4t+v2FfEzycVqpXJDmwn7lsEHncxvC22aNn985Ajo/woK1QA 0nWsavx2yTs/YhWKw8HgqQxhFUalCm7IBfk+pPZqd2hWTpN2vEsUYw+7CKviVHruaM4Q K78E4hRVY+JfxsxERzKwLlPLpj/LtIfFrzvckqCYrsEZ/A4W2MAmP67XLD1YxcBbP3nl wHgQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QU9XeMHju0zeNQ8AWN7Rwg7SmsCSaVz4gKwplxRVHFY=; b=HWb0fJbXZ1hWNQPxz7oyMrTM0al7ST8WvDkigvAK7Duk7+ZJvD5qulInPuUY96NoRU EMgvZozaSF/bUoJs5Rz6ln2jATu+OGL/JpN72OoHbScU7RqVJADXfFT3eKk2SYyCDfie 1BH0aOsqN+lWUnFfDKnpqPqPhjxK97/MrSdNXs66Q2vf57iIyUVjiZAzzWWxJvtK0WRs BT267TWMrL7WBIeSUU0gK7eW2542z4EvmNdg0JT5S+YX43RFcMmhiFFHKgl5snj23PcU qEIOzhjTTrZr+tI69FPwq3BhqgW3b8ImE+CrW1bCrxI20SbvgiE8EXTy307+uINIEdD0 SFSQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXehnd6/lwl9j8EVNDO8iSFFGubhBzcGZx0GhLl5jhJoNd5TgNg juAROaJkvhG+xVkY7Rj35JSaBKPbyjRvgUgVZ3U= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxccD+K+UtgPEwHqEGuA+D9/sIn6pz9bdwfN6htUjL1brvdqIkeF2AD6DBgCWOtTYOYofUx+o3at+VwUuc4zVI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:2c7:: with SMTP id f7mr17291844ljo.125.1580832293005; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 08:04:53 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <84629438-89A5-4E41-A80D-0DEAA34394F9@thinkingcat.com> In-Reply-To: <84629438-89A5-4E41-A80D-0DEAA34394F9@thinkingcat.com> From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2020 10:04:26 -0600 Message-ID: To: Leslie Daigle Cc: Kyle Rose , Matt Stock , mops@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000462ff8059dc2335a" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Mops] Confirming adoption consensus Re: draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 16:04:58 -0000 --000000000000462ff8059dc2335a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Leslie, On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 10:40 PM Leslie Daigle wrote: > Spencer, > > One thing I=E2=80=99ve been trying to find out is: how to tie a git repo = to the > IETF. Looking at the CELLAR example, it seems like one just makes the > assertion that it is the WG git repo? And, it seems odd that there are no > visible members, let alone owner, of the git repo? > > Apologies if I=E2=80=99m missing the obvious. > I don't think you are. I believe the current state of play is described in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-05, especially in Section 2.1 and following sections (note that this draft is in PUBREQ state, so it's probably mostly right, but hasn't even been through AD review yet). Some of the text is input to the tools team, but most (selecting organization names, etc.) isn't dependent on datatracker support. I believe you are correct that in Github, that's an assertion. In the datatracker, co-chairs can add the URL for the organization (I think you can just stick this on the working group page now, but apparently there's development underway that would allow the datatracker to know that URL is a GitHub repository). I've only been watching CELLAR for a few weeks, so don't know the history on defined users, etc. - sorry! I hope that's helpful. Spencer > Leslie. > > On 3 Feb 2020, at 21:27, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: > > Hi, Kyle, > > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 4:01 PM Kyle Rose wrote: > >> I'll look into the right way to set this up. I'm not sure that the QUIC >> single-repo model makes sense here, but one or more official MOPS repos = for >> adopted docs seems like a good idea. >> > > I'm certainly not the genius of Github at IETF, but I'd tend to agree - > the MOPS documents aren't likely to have the same tight linkages and > intersecting participant lists that the QUIC core protocol specifications > do. I'm recently co-chair of CELLAR, and that working group uses 4 repos > (see https://github.com/cellar-wg for details). > > Best, > > Spencer > > >> >> Kyle >> >> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 1:17 PM Spencer Dawkins at IETF < >> spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, Leslie, >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 11:34 AM Leslie Daigle >>> wrote: >>> >>>> That=E2=80=99s a fair question. >>>> >>>> IMO, if people are generally interested in using GitHub for docs in >>>> this WG, we should. Kyle? >>>> >>>> There seems to be some leaning that way, given Jake & Ali=E2=80=99s us= e so far, >>>> but I, at least, would like to hear from others to know whether the >>>> interest in using GitHub for documents extends beyond the authors of t= hat >>>> particular document? >>>> >>> I certainly am (I have a PR waiting for that particular document now, >>> but I don't know why we would not want to use Github for other docs). >>> >>> I'd also note that Ali has at least a few issues in Jake's repository >>> now, and I've been waiting to see if the repository would change upon >>> adoption before adding issues of my own. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Spencer >>> >>>> Leslie. >>>> >>>> On 30 Jan 2020, at 16:51, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: >>>> >>>> Since we seem to be getting "support" e-mail and the 31st is tomorrow, >>>> is it too early to ask if the working group will have its own reposito= ry >>>> for working group drafts? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Spencer >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:25 PM Matt Stock wrote: >>>> >>>>> I support the adoption of the draft. >>>>> >>>>> Matt >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:45 PM Leslie Daigle >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, Jake, for putting together the follow ups from the IETF 106 >>>>>> MOPS meeting. >>>>>> >>>>>> I=E2=80=99m happy to see others have already started chiming in with= comments. >>>>>> >>>>>> We had pretty strong consensus in the room to take this on as a WG >>>>>> item, and I=E2=80=99m happy to formally follow that up on the list h= ere and now. >>>>>> >>>>>> If anyone *objects* to adoption of the document ( >>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01), please >>>>>> share your objection now. >>>>>> >>>>>> If there is no (unresolved) objection by the end of January 31, 2020= , >>>>>> we will adopt this document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons .... >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Leslie. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:26, Holland, Jake wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Mops, >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm finally writing to follow up on draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy. >>>>>> >>>>>> I did a quick review of the video from the IETF 106 mops meeting: >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D4_k340xT2jM >>>>>> >>>>>> I captured the comments I heard in a new notes section and >>>>>> updated the draft to -01, plus a few very minor editing tweaks. >>>>>> I was going to rename it to draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons, but >>>>>> I thought I'd wait until after the adoption call, to make sure it's >>>>>> confirmed on-list. (I think the data tracker is easier to use when >>>>>> you change names less often...) >>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01 >>>>>> >>>>>> I also wanted to say thanks to the folks who volunteered to co-autho= r >>>>>> this draft. You 3 are BCC'd, and your contributions are very welcome= . >>>>>> >>>>>> I also wanted to ask whether there's any particular topics you'll be >>>>>> working on, so we don't get multiple people writing to the same >>>>>> points? >>>>>> >>>>>> Regardless, for the moment the current version is here and I'm >>>>>> accepting pull requests :) : >>>>>> https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts >>>>>> >>>>>> Assuming the adoption call starts soon and is successful, we maybe >>>>>> should move to a WG-owned repo, but that's where it is for now. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks and regards, >>>>>> Jake >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Mops mailing list >>>>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>> >>>>>> Leslie Daigle >>>>>> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises >>>>>> ldaigle@thinkingcat.com >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Mops mailing list >>>>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> [image: Limelight Networks] >>>>> Matt Stock* Principal Architect* >>>>> EXPERIENCE FIRST. >>>>> +1 716 949 0332 <+1+716+949+0332> >>>>> www.limelight.com >>>>> [image: Facebook] [image: >>>>> LinkedIn] [image= : >>>>> Twitter] >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Mops mailing list >>>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Mops mailing list >>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Leslie Daigle >>>> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises >>>> ldaigle@thinkingcat.com >>>> >>> -- > Mops mailing list > Mops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops > > -- > ------------------------------ > > Leslie Daigle > Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises > ldaigle@thinkingcat.com > --000000000000462ff8059dc2335a Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, Leslie,=C2=A0
<= br>
On Mon,= Feb 3, 2020 at 10:40 PM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com> wrote:

Spencer,

One thing I=E2=80=99ve been trying to find out is: how to = tie a git repo to the IETF. Looking at the CELLAR example, it seems like o= ne just makes the assertion that it is the WG git repo? And, it seems odd = that there are no visible members, let alone owner, of the git repo?

Apologies if I=E2=80=99m missing the obvious.

I don't think you are.=C2=A0

I believe the current state of play is described in=C2=A0= https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-05, = especially in Section 2.1 and following sections (note that this draft is i= n PUBREQ state, so it's probably mostly right, but hasn't even been= through AD review yet). Some of the text is input to the tools team, but m= ost (selecting organization names, etc.) isn't dependent on datatracker= support.=C2=A0

I believe you are correct that in = Github, that's an assertion. In the datatracker, co-chairs can add the = URL for the organization (I think you can just stick this on the working gr= oup page now, but apparently there's development underway that would al= low the datatracker to know that URL is a GitHub repository).
I've only been watching CELLAR for a few weeks, so don'= t know the history on defined users, etc. - sorry!

I hope that's helpful.

Spencer

Leslie.

On 3 Feb 2020, at 21:27, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:

Hi, Kyle,= =C2=A0

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 4:01 PM Kyle Rose <krose@krose.org> wrote:
I'll look into the right way to set th= is up. I'm not sure that the QUIC single-repo model makes sense here, b= ut one or more official MOPS repos for adopted docs seems like a good idea.=

I'm certainly not the geni= us of Github at IETF, but I'd tend to agree - the MOPS documents aren&#= 39;t likely to have the same tight linkages and intersecting participant li= sts that the QUIC core protocol specifications do. I'm recently co-chai= r of CELLAR, and that working group uses 4 repos (see=C2=A0https://github.com/cellar-wg= for details).=C2=A0

Best,

Spencer
=C2=A0

=
Kyle

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 1:17 PM Spencer Dawkins at= IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
=
Hi, Leslie,=C2=A0

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at = 11:34 AM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com> wrote:

That=E2=80=99s a fair question.

IMO, if people are generally interested in using GitHub for= docs in this WG, we should. Kyle?

There seems to be some leaning that way, given Jake & A= li=E2=80=99s use so far, but I, at least, would like to hear from others to= know whether the interest in using GitHub for documents extends beyond the= authors of that particular document?

I certainly am (I have a PR waiting for that particular document now, but= I don't know why we would not want to use Github for other docs).=C2= =A0

I'd also note that Ali has at least a few = issues in Jake's repository now, and I've been waiting to see if th= e repository would change upon adoption before adding issues of my own.

Best,

Spencer=C2=A0

Leslie.

On 30 Jan 2020, at 16:51, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:

Since we seem to be getting "sup= port" e-mail and the 31st is tomorrow, is it too early to ask if the w= orking group will have its own repository for working group drafts?
Thanks,

Spencer

On Thu, Jan 30, 2= 020 at 3:25 PM Matt Stock <mstock@llnw.com> wrote:
I support the adoption of the draft.

Matt
=


On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:45 PM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com<= /a>> wrote:

Thanks, Jake, for putting together the follow ups from the = IETF 106 MOPS meeting.

I=E2=80=99m happy to see others have already started chimin= g in with comments.

We had pretty strong consensus in the room to take this on = as a WG item, and I=E2=80=99m happy to formally follow that up on the list = here and now.

If anyone objects to adoption of the document (https://tools.ietf.org/html/dra= ft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01), please share your objection now.

If there is no (unresolved) objection by the end of January= 31, 2020, we will adopt this document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons = ....

Thanks,
Leslie.

On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:26, Holland, Jake wrote:

Hi Mops,

I'm finally writing to follow up on draft-jholland-mops= -taxonomy.

I did a quick review of the video from the IETF 106 mops me= eting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D4_k340x= T2jM

I captured the comments I heard in a new notes section and<= br> updated the draft to -01, plus a few very minor editing tweaks.
I was going to rename it to draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons, but
I thought I'd wait until after the adoption call, to make sure it's=
confirmed on-list. (I think the data tracker is easier to use when
you change names less often...)
https://tools.ietf.org/html= /draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01

I also wanted to say thanks to the folks who volunteered to= co-author
this draft. You 3 are BCC'd, and your contributions are very welcome.<= /p>

I also wanted to ask whether there's any particular top= ics you'll be
working on, so we don't get multiple people writing to the same points?=

Regardless, for the moment the current version is here and = I'm
accepting pull requests :) :
https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ie= tf-mops-drafts

Assuming the adoption call starts soon and is successful, w= e maybe
should move to a WG-owned repo, but that's where it is for now.

Thanks and regards,
Jake

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises

ldaigle@thinkingcat.com=

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops


--
3D"Limelight
Matt Stock=C2=A0Principal Architect=
EXPERIENCE FIRST.
+1 716 949 0332
www.limelight.com
3D"Facebook"<= a style=3D"margin-left:3px" href=3D"https://www.linkedin.com/company/limeli= ght-networks" target=3D"_blank">3D"Link=3D"Twitte=


--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops
--000000000000462ff8059dc2335a-- From nobody Tue Feb 4 11:29:22 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E611512089B for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 11:29:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=thinkingcat.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TePr5yNC5HYk for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 11:29:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from bumble.birch.relay.mailchannels.net (bumble.birch.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.209.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91E96120832 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 11:29:16 -0800 (PST) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 913DA74090A; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 19:29:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a21.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-9-4.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.9.4]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 944DA740D58; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 19:29:13 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a21.g.dreamhost.com ([TEMPUNAVAIL]. [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.5); Tue, 04 Feb 2020 19:29:14 +0000 X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Thread-Drop: 418fd5273fa59263_1580844554121_195391952 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1580844554121:1442147527 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1580844554121 Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a21.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a21.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18DBF91ECB; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 11:29:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=thinkingcat.com; h=from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=thinkingcat.com; bh=N XG8TgKsc6So4qoOBu+P40uzCJw=; b=KGzxggtQGKa275z7V7Rg8MJC8WP5dFwy4 4VC4pM+EGSbp3S3zLRYg3OqZKcwedmo4GXqL+1M79kf64wt1U8W/tvbrSQ65S4iC banbpcn1JXaaAdn6SLYYqs+3ka/Cs6HhDYa+0P+OX2UXbRNpY8ud+YerEWqhqlwy JPYnCtcWww= Received: from [172.21.4.151] (unknown [8.37.96.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ldaigle@thinkingcat.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a21.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8958B91EC7; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 11:29:07 -0800 (PST) X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a21 From: "Leslie Daigle" To: "Spencer Dawkins at IETF" Cc: "Matt Stock" , "Kyle Rose" , mops@ietf.org Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 14:28:46 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <84629438-89A5-4E41-A80D-0DEAA34394F9@thinkingcat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_7BE4ECDC-CACC-4F75-B170-9EA9990DAA24_=" X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK X-VR-OUT-SCORE: -100 X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrgeelgdduvddtucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgdpffftgfetoffjqffuvfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvufffoffkjghfgggtgfesrgekmherredtjeenucfhrhhomhepfdfnvghslhhivgcuffgrihhglhgvfdcuoehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmqeenucffohhmrghinhepihgvthhfrdhorhhgpdhgihhthhhusgdrtghomhdphihouhhtuhgsvgdrtghomhdplhhimhgvlhhighhhthdrtghomhdpfhgrtggvsghoohhkrdgtohhmpdhlihhnkhgvughinhdrtghomhdpthifihhtthgvrhdrrdgtohhmnecukfhppeekrdefjedrleeirdefleenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhhouggvpehsmhhtphdphhgvlhhopegludejvddrvddurdegrdduhedungdpihhnvghtpeekrdefjedrleeirdefledprhgvthhurhhnqdhprghthhepfdfnvghslhhivgcuffgrihhglhgvfdcuoehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmqedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmpdhnrhgtphhtthhopehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhm Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Mops] Confirming adoption consensus Re: draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 19:29:20 -0000 --=_MailMate_7BE4ECDC-CACC-4F75-B170-9EA9990DAA24_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Spencer, On 4 Feb 2020, at 11:04, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: > Hi, Leslie, > > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 10:40 PM Leslie Daigle=20 > > wrote: > >> Spencer, >> >> One thing I=E2=80=99ve been trying to find out is: how to tie a git re= po to=20 >> the >> IETF. Looking at the CELLAR example, it seems like one just makes the >> assertion that it is the WG git repo? And, it seems odd that there=20 >> are no >> visible members, let alone owner, of the git repo? >> >> Apologies if I=E2=80=99m missing the obvious. >> > I don't think you are. > > I believe the current state of play is described in > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-05, > especially in Section 2.1 and following sections (note that this draft=20 > is > in PUBREQ state, so it's probably mostly right, but hasn't even been > through AD review yet). Some of the text is input to the tools team,=20 > but > most (selecting organization names, etc.) isn't dependent on=20 > datatracker > support. Yep, I had read through that. > > I believe you are correct that in Github, that's an assertion. In the > datatracker, co-chairs can add the URL for the organization (I think=20 > you > can just stick this on the working group page now, but apparently=20 > there's > development underway that would allow the datatracker to know that URL=20 > is a > GitHub repository). That=E2=80=99s a good point =E2=80=94 it leaves it within the IETF=E2=80=99= s purview to=20 identify any =E2=80=9Cauthentic=E2=80=9D repo. > > I've only been watching CELLAR for a few weeks, so don't know the=20 > history > on defined users, etc. - sorry! > > I hope that's helpful. I=E2=80=99m confident GitHub isn=E2=80=99t going away any time soon, but = my general=20 concern follows on from the IETF=E2=80=99s experience when everybody host= ed=20 their own WG mailing list (federated responsibility! No single point of=20 failure!) and archives were lost when people got irritated with the IETF=20 or companies went belly-up. I think it would be good if the IETF had a more persistent role in the=20 administration of the git repos, if a group=E2=80=99s work is going to de= pend=20 on it. As a co-chair of MOPS, I don=E2=80=99t want to get in the way of providin= g a=20 tool that current participants actually want to use! But, I also want=20 to make sure we use it in a way that is going to stand up to the test of=20 time. Leslie. > > Spencer > >> Leslie. >> >> On 3 Feb 2020, at 21:27, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: >> >> Hi, Kyle, >> >> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 4:01 PM Kyle Rose wrote: >> >>> I'll look into the right way to set this up. I'm not sure that the=20 >>> QUIC >>> single-repo model makes sense here, but one or more official MOPS=20 >>> repos for >>> adopted docs seems like a good idea. >>> >> >> I'm certainly not the genius of Github at IETF, but I'd tend to agree=20 >> - >> the MOPS documents aren't likely to have the same tight linkages and >> intersecting participant lists that the QUIC core protocol=20 >> specifications >> do. I'm recently co-chair of CELLAR, and that working group uses 4=20 >> repos >> (see https://github.com/cellar-wg for details). >> >> Best, >> >> Spencer >> >> >>> >>> Kyle >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 1:17 PM Spencer Dawkins at IETF < >>> spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, Leslie, >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 11:34 AM Leslie Daigle=20 >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> That=E2=80=99s a fair question. >>>>> >>>>> IMO, if people are generally interested in using GitHub for docs=20 >>>>> in >>>>> this WG, we should. Kyle? >>>>> >>>>> There seems to be some leaning that way, given Jake & Ali=E2=80=99s= use=20 >>>>> so far, >>>>> but I, at least, would like to hear from others to know whether=20 >>>>> the >>>>> interest in using GitHub for documents extends beyond the authors=20 >>>>> of that >>>>> particular document? >>>>> >>>> I certainly am (I have a PR waiting for that particular document=20 >>>> now, >>>> but I don't know why we would not want to use Github for other=20 >>>> docs). >>>> >>>> I'd also note that Ali has at least a few issues in Jake's=20 >>>> repository >>>> now, and I've been waiting to see if the repository would change=20 >>>> upon >>>> adoption before adding issues of my own. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Spencer >>>> >>>>> Leslie. >>>>> >>>>> On 30 Jan 2020, at 16:51, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Since we seem to be getting "support" e-mail and the 31st is=20 >>>>> tomorrow, >>>>> is it too early to ask if the working group will have its own=20 >>>>> repository >>>>> for working group drafts? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Spencer >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:25 PM Matt Stock =20 >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I support the adoption of the draft. >>>>>> >>>>>> Matt >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:45 PM Leslie Daigle=20 >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, Jake, for putting together the follow ups from the IETF=20 >>>>>>> 106 >>>>>>> MOPS meeting. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I=E2=80=99m happy to see others have already started chiming in w= ith=20 >>>>>>> comments. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We had pretty strong consensus in the room to take this on as a=20 >>>>>>> WG >>>>>>> item, and I=E2=80=99m happy to formally follow that up on the lis= t=20 >>>>>>> here and now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If anyone *objects* to adoption of the document ( >>>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01),=20 >>>>>>> please >>>>>>> share your objection now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If there is no (unresolved) objection by the end of January 31,=20 >>>>>>> 2020, >>>>>>> we will adopt this document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons=20 >>>>>>> .... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Leslie. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:26, Holland, Jake wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Mops, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm finally writing to follow up on=20 >>>>>>> draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I did a quick review of the video from the IETF 106 mops=20 >>>>>>> meeting: >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D4_k340xT2jM >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I captured the comments I heard in a new notes section and >>>>>>> updated the draft to -01, plus a few very minor editing tweaks. >>>>>>> I was going to rename it to draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons,=20 >>>>>>> but >>>>>>> I thought I'd wait until after the adoption call, to make sure=20 >>>>>>> it's >>>>>>> confirmed on-list. (I think the data tracker is easier to use=20 >>>>>>> when >>>>>>> you change names less often...) >>>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy-01 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I also wanted to say thanks to the folks who volunteered to=20 >>>>>>> co-author >>>>>>> this draft. You 3 are BCC'd, and your contributions are very=20 >>>>>>> welcome.. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I also wanted to ask whether there's any particular topics=20 >>>>>>> you'll be >>>>>>> working on, so we don't get multiple people writing to the same >>>>>>> points? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regardless, for the moment the current version is here and I'm >>>>>>> accepting pull requests :) : >>>>>>> https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Assuming the adoption call starts soon and is successful, we=20 >>>>>>> maybe >>>>>>> should move to a WG-owned repo, but that's where it is for now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks and regards, >>>>>>> Jake >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Mops mailing list >>>>>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Leslie Daigle >>>>>>> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises >>>>>>> ldaigle@thinkingcat.com >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Mops mailing list >>>>>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> [image: Limelight Networks] >>>>>> Matt Stock* Principal Architect* >>>>>> EXPERIENCE FIRST. >>>>>> +1 716 949 0332 <+1+716+949+0332> >>>>>> www.limelight.com >>>>>> [image: Facebook]=20 >>>>>> [image: >>>>>> LinkedIn]=20 >>>>>> [image: >>>>>> Twitter] >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Mops mailing list >>>>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Mops mailing list >>>>> Mops@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> Leslie Daigle >>>>> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises >>>>> ldaigle@thinkingcat.com >>>>> >>>> -- >> Mops mailing list >> Mops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops >> >> -- >> ------------------------------ >> >> Leslie Daigle >> Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises >> ldaigle@thinkingcat.com >> > --=20 > Mops mailing list > Mops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops --=20 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Leslie Daigle Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises ldaigle@thinkingcat.com ------------------------------------------------------------------- --=_MailMate_7BE4ECDC-CACC-4F75-B170-9EA9990DAA24_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Spencer,

On 4 Feb 2020, at 11:04, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:

H= i, Leslie,

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 10:40 PM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com= >
wrote:

Spencer,
One thing I=E2=80=99ve been trying to find out is: how to tie a git repo = to the
IETF. Looking at the CELLAR example, it seems like one just makes the
= assertion that it is the WG git repo? And, it seems odd that there are no=
visible members, let alone owner, of the git repo?

Apologies if I=E2=80=99m missing the obvious.

I don't think you are.

I believe the current state of play is described in
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-git-= github-wg-configuration-05,
especially in Section 2.1 and following sections (note that this draft is=
in PUBREQ state, so it's probably mostly right, but hasn't even been
through AD review yet). Some of the text is input to the tools team, but<= br> most (selecting organization names, etc.) isn't dependent on datatracker<= br> support.

Yep, I had read through that.

I= believe you are correct that in Github, that's an assertion. In the
datatracker, co-chairs can add the URL for the organization (I think you<= br> can just stick this on the working group page now, but apparently there's=
development underway that would allow the datatracker to know that URL is= a
GitHub repository).

That=E2=80=99s a good point =E2=80=94 it leaves it within= the IETF=E2=80=99s purview to identify any =E2=80=9Cauthentic=E2=80=9D r= epo.

I= 've only been watching CELLAR for a few weeks, so don't know the history<= br> on defined users, etc. - sorry!

I hope that's helpful.

I=E2=80=99m confident GitHub isn=E2=80=99t going away any= time soon, but my general concern follows on from the IETF=E2=80=99s exp= erience when everybody hosted their own WG mailing list (federated respon= sibility! No single point of failure!) and archives were lost when peopl= e got irritated with the IETF or companies went belly-up.

I think it would be good if the IETF had a more persisten= t role in the administration of the git repos, if a group=E2=80=99s work = is going to depend on it.

As a co-chair of MOPS, I don=E2=80=99t want to get in the= way of providing a tool that current participants actually want to use! = But, I also want to make sure we use it in a way that is going to stand = up to the test of time.

Leslie.

S= pencer

Leslie.
=
On 3 Feb 2020, at 21:27, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:

Hi, Kyle,

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 4:01 PM Kyle Rose <krose@krose.org> wrote:

I'll look i= nto the right way to set this up. I'm not sure that the QUIC
single-repo model makes sense here, but one or more official MOPS repos f= or
adopted docs seems like a good idea.

I'm certainly not the genius of Github at IE= TF, but I'd tend to agree -
the MOPS documents aren't likely to have the same tight linkages and
intersecting participant lists that the QUIC core protocol specifications=
do. I'm recently co-chair of CELLAR, and that working group uses 4 repos<= br> (see https:= //github.com/cellar-wg for details).

Best,

Spencer

Kyle

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 1:17 PM Spencer Dawkins at IETF <
spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi, Leslie,=

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 11:34 AM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.co= m>
wrote:

That=E2=80=99= s a fair question.

IMO, if people are generally interested in using GitHub for docs in
this WG, we should. Kyle?

There seems to be some leaning that way, given Jake & Ali=E2=80=99s u= se so far,
but I, at least, would like to hear from others to know whether the
interest in using GitHub for documents extends beyond the authors of that=
particular document?

I certainly am (I have a PR waiting for that= particular document now,
but I don't know why we would not want to use Github for other docs).
=
I'd also note that Ali has at least a few issues in Jake's repository
= now, and I've been waiting to see if the repository would change upon
= adoption before adding issues of my own.

Best,

Spencer

Leslie.
=
On 30 Jan 2020, at 16:51, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:

Since we seem to be getting "support" e-mail and the 31st is tomorrow, is it too early to ask if the working group will have its own repository<= br> for working group drafts?

Thanks,

Spencer

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:25 PM Matt Stock <mstock@llnw.com> wrote:=

I support t= he adoption of the draft.

Matt


On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:45 PM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com= >
wrote:

Thanks, Jak= e, for putting together the follow ups from the IETF 106
MOPS meeting.

I=E2=80=99m happy to see others have already started chiming in with comm= ents.

We had pretty strong consensus in the room to take this on as a WG
item, and I=E2=80=99m happy to formally follow that up on the list here a= nd now.

If anyone *objects* to adoption of the document (
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxon= omy-01), please
share your objection now.

If there is no (unresolved) objection by the end of January 31, 2020,
= we will adopt this document as draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons ....

Thanks,
Leslie.

On 17 Jan 2020, at 17:26, Holland, Jake wrote:

Hi Mops,

I'm finally writing to follow up on draft-jholland-mops-taxonomy.

I did a quick review of the video from the IETF 106 mops meeting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D4_k340xT2jM

I captured the comments I heard in a new notes section and
updated the draft to -01, plus a few very minor editing tweaks.
I was going to rename it to draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons, but
I thought I'd wait until after the adoption call, to make sure it's
confirmed on-list. (I think the data tracker is easier to use when
you change names less often...)
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jholland-mops-taxon= omy-01

I also wanted to say thanks to the folks who volunteered to co-author
= this draft. You 3 are BCC'd, and your contributions are very welcome..
I also wanted to ask whether there's any particular topics you'll be
working on, so we don't get multiple people writing to the same
points?

Regardless, for the moment the current version is here and I'm
accepting pull requests :) :
https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts

Assuming the adoption call starts soon and is successful, we maybe
should move to a WG-owned repo, but that's where it is for now.

Thanks and regards,
Jake

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--
------------------------------

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises
ldaigle@thinkingcat.com
--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--
[image: Limelight Networks] <https://www.limelight.com>
Matt Stock* Principal Architect*
EXPERIENCE FIRST.
+1 716 949 0332 <+1+716+949+0332>
www.limelight.com
[image: Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/LimelightNetworks&g= t;[image:
LinkedIn] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/limelight-netw= orks>[image:
Twitter] <h= ttps://twitter..com/llnw>

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--
------------------------------

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises
ldaigle@thinkingcat.com

--

Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--
------------------------------

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises
ldaigle@thinkingcat.com


-- Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises

ldaigle@thinkingcat.com

--=_MailMate_7BE4ECDC-CACC-4F75-B170-9EA9990DAA24_=-- From nobody Wed Feb 5 07:40:45 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 584BA12010F for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 07:40:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=krose.org Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BSLL_XJ-FFeG for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 07:40:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yw1-xc43.google.com (mail-yw1-xc43.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E004120052 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 07:40:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yw1-xc43.google.com with SMTP id f204so2688172ywc.10 for ; Wed, 05 Feb 2020 07:40:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=krose.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=T8WVUd8cX2xWV9SSMz2oVYIH9Opi1e7+2DzOBN5oZ/M=; b=JthsXI1aAlvb2XuHELmiaqhLJ5Qqp/AVxGSgqmldQZSgqkJimw44aLcGNU4Csv3PKQ Qj0pjeEWlGEeDyLTx9XneoeUd+juzqyCyfVu9rIIQDxlIppawqslOMv/Dys49jEelUUK w+A5TLnb42RQZIyf6G8nq6KL2vBj54ZVP3rV8= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=T8WVUd8cX2xWV9SSMz2oVYIH9Opi1e7+2DzOBN5oZ/M=; b=E9TB2xCYCCKa4aH957dE+1KprcN+gMAPNatITjrq12MZhreChftAnrumVSJd0Uo6uA 7evn9ooLKTM9bfb5yhts8RSWT1eQtFi6NuxbmZZWyA3zslWaxRl0P6yzH0XIpP9Y9qaC 6St2eBuPKemgINS46zt+T41BvIRMmoXeO1HeUK3rRzdvWmy3Pyj8BhSeTasa9PMkHmQB 0G2uPfhF2W5tDAsTSITHsug/Ob5yDeVjPKERvfFjQEcPZhauwFoGIVFG7Fb2mKFLC8yg OkuTMVdJq2TC/OBBgCzEKtz/0Ol03DEu1Aw82mk2AKBw7uhcGORvICQO9Iy20aKOu2kq DfHQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWq9+hdY6IFiyMOcZqWD9V0sd9aX0TWwVrNWviRCpam4e6lKiTi PFdK7/0/R1VsUK7HBo6zvStinuFA6QGrpq0tXx3a+vEadNggyw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz2bjeJy6eyrs4G5VXK+WqAS/sw2GB7Kgg8FdbSLiq9dFx1xMVAGXFcgPa25aljw6Ed2TWG4jjYcB8VU8HGUkg= X-Received: by 2002:a81:50d6:: with SMTP id e205mr10358561ywb.208.1580917239340; Wed, 05 Feb 2020 07:40:39 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <84629438-89A5-4E41-A80D-0DEAA34394F9@thinkingcat.com> In-Reply-To: From: Kyle Rose Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 10:40:28 -0500 Message-ID: To: Leslie Daigle Cc: Spencer Dawkins at IETF , Matt Stock , mops@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007872fa059dd5fac7" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Mops] Confirming adoption consensus Re: draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 15:40:44 -0000 --0000000000007872fa059dd5fac7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think ownership might be covered, at least from a policy perspective, by some text from the git draft (notwithstanding the weaselly use of the passive voice): When an area director or working group chair makes a request to create a GitHub organization, the following process would be initiated: 1. Create a GitHub organization for the working group. 2. Name the organization as ietf-wg- 3. Initialize the organization by designating the IETF Secretariat and the area directors in the working group's area as owners. If the responsible AD for the working group is from another area, that AD will be an owner as well. 4. Initialize the organization with a team that has administrator access. This team will consist of the working group chairs and working group secretary, if one exists. After the organization is created, the URL for the organization would be added to the working group's page in the Datatracker. Steps 3 and 4 above imply that the GitHub identities of the organization owners and administrators are known. Recording GitHub identities in the Datatracker (see ) would facilitate this. The person requesting the organization would need to be notified if the GitHub identities of any of the people meant to be owners or administrators were not available. Maybe less inspiring is the wording from the following section, which uses something very close to RFC 6919 "REALLY OUGHT TO" language: If a working group already has an organization, it would be useful to be able to make it have the same management as one would get with going through the steps in Section 2.1 . That is, it would be good to be able to run steps 3 and 4 from Section 2.1 so that the rest of the activities in this section such as personnel work the same for the organizations that were created on their own. I'm inclined to go forward with creating a mops-wg organization on the assumption that, at worst, we're in the same boat with other WGs using GitHub, but maybe we should have a consensus call on whether participants want to incorporate an official GitHub org into their workflows. Otherwise, individual document teams are still free use unofficial GitHub repos for revision control and manageability of collaboration, but we would probably need to be more strict about conducting official work on the mailing list, which could negate some of the advantages of using GitHub. Kyle On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 2:29 PM Leslie Daigle wrote: > Hi Spencer, > > On 4 Feb 2020, at 11:04, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: > > Hi, Leslie, > > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 10:40 PM Leslie Daigle > wrote: > > Spencer, > > One thing I=E2=80=99ve been trying to find out is: how to tie a git repo = to the > IETF. Looking at the CELLAR example, it seems like one just makes the > assertion that it is the WG git repo? And, it seems odd that there are no > visible members, let alone owner, of the git repo? > > Apologies if I=E2=80=99m missing the obvious. > > I don't think you are. > > I believe the current state of play is described in > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-05, > especially in Section 2.1 and following sections (note that this draft is > in PUBREQ state, so it's probably mostly right, but hasn't even been > through AD review yet). Some of the text is input to the tools team, but > most (selecting organization names, etc.) isn't dependent on datatracker > support. > > Yep, I had read through that. > > I believe you are correct that in Github, that's an assertion. In the > datatracker, co-chairs can add the URL for the organization (I think you > can just stick this on the working group page now, but apparently there's > development underway that would allow the datatracker to know that URL is= a > GitHub repository). > > That=E2=80=99s a good point =E2=80=94 it leaves it within the IETF=E2=80= =99s purview to identify > any =E2=80=9Cauthentic=E2=80=9D repo. > > I've only been watching CELLAR for a few weeks, so don't know the history > on defined users, etc. - sorry! > > I hope that's helpful. > > I=E2=80=99m confident GitHub isn=E2=80=99t going away any time soon, but = my general > concern follows on from the IETF=E2=80=99s experience when everybody host= ed their > own WG mailing list (federated responsibility! No single point of failure= !) > and archives were lost when people got irritated with the IETF or compani= es > went belly-up. > > I think it would be good if the IETF had a more persistent role in the > administration of the git repos, if a group=E2=80=99s work is going to de= pend on it. > > As a co-chair of MOPS, I don=E2=80=99t want to get in the way of providin= g a tool > that current participants actually want to use! But, I also want to make > sure we use it in a way that is going to stand up to the test of time. > > Leslie. > --0000000000007872fa059dd5fac7 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think ownership might be covered, = at least from a policy perspective, by some text from the git draft (notwit= hstanding the weaselly use of the passive voice):
   When an area director or working group chair makes a reque=
st to
   create a GitHub organization, the following process would be
   initiated:

   1.  Create a GitHub organization for the working group.

   2.  Name the organization as ietf-wg-<wgname>

   3.  Initialize the organization by designating the IETF Secretariat
       and the area directors in the working group's area as owners.  I=
f
       the responsible AD for the working group is from another area,
       that AD will be an owner as well.

   4.  Initialize the organization with a team that has administrator
       access.  This team will consist of the working group chairs and
       working group secretary, if one exists.

   After the organization is created, the URL for the organization would
   be added to the working group's page in the Datatracker.

   Steps 3 and 4 above imply that the GitHub identities of the
   organization owners and administrators are known.  Recording GitHub
   identities in the Datatracker (see
   <htt=
ps://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb/ticket/2548>) would
   facilitate this.  The person requesting the organization would need
   to be notified if the GitHub identities of any of the people meant to
   be owners or administrators were not available.
Maybe le= ss inspiring is the wording from the following section, which uses somethin= g very close to RFC 6919 "REALLY OUGHT TO" language:
   If a working group already has an organiz=
ation, it would be useful to
   be able to make it have the same management as one would get with
   going through the steps in Section 2.1.  That is,=
 it would be good to
   be able to run steps 3 and 4 from Section 2.1 so =
that the rest of the
   activities in this section such as personnel work the same for the
   organizations that were created on their own.
I'm incl= ined to go forward with creating a mops-wg organization on the assumption t= hat, at worst, we're in the same boat with other WGs using GitHub, but = maybe we should have a consensus call on whether participants want to incor= porate an official GitHub org into their workflows. Otherwise, individual d= ocument teams are still free use unofficial GitHub repos for revision contr= ol and manageability of collaboration, but we would probably need to be mor= e strict about conducting official work on the mailing list, which could ne= gate some of the advantages of using GitHub.

K= yle

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 2:29 PM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com> wrote:<= br>

Hi Spencer,

On 4 Feb 2020, at 11:04, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:

Hi, Leslie,

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 10:40 PM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com>
wrote:

Spencer,

One thing I=E2=80=99ve been trying to find out is: how to tie a git repo to= the
IETF. Looking at the CELLAR example, it seems like one just makes the
assertion that it is the WG git repo? And, it seems odd that there are no visible members, let alone owner, of the git repo?

Apologies if I=E2=80=99m missing the obvious.

I don't think you are.

I believe the current state of play is described in
https://tools.iet= f.org/html/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-05,
especially in Section 2.1 and following sections (note that this draft is in PUBREQ state, so it's probably mostly right, but hasn't even bee= n
through AD review yet). Some of the text is input to the tools team, but most (selecting organization names, etc.) isn't dependent on datatracke= r
support.

Yep, I had read through that.

I believe you are correct that in Github, that's an= assertion. In the
datatracker, co-chairs can add the URL for the organization (I think you can just stick this on the working group page now, but apparently there'= ;s
development underway that would allow the datatracker to know that URL is a=
GitHub repository).

That=E2=80=99s a good point =E2=80=94 it leaves it within t= he IETF=E2=80=99s purview to identify any =E2=80=9Cauthentic=E2=80=9D repo.=

I've only been watching CELLAR for a few weeks, so = don't know the history
on defined users, etc. - sorry!

I hope that's helpful.

I=E2=80=99m confident GitHub isn=E2=80=99t going away any t= ime soon, but my general concern follows on from the IETF=E2=80=99s experie= nce when everybody hosted their own WG mailing list (federated responsibili= ty! No single point of failure!) and archives were lost when people got ir= ritated with the IETF or companies went belly-up.

I think it would be good if the IETF had a more persistent = role in the administration of the git repos, if a group=E2=80=99s work is g= oing to depend on it.

As a co-chair of MOPS, I don=E2=80=99t want to get in the w= ay of providing a tool that current participants actually want to use! But= , I also want to make sure we use it in a way that is going to stand up to = the test of time.

Leslie.

<quote tr= immed>
--0000000000007872fa059dd5fac7-- From nobody Wed Feb 5 10:09:54 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C77C1201E4 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 10:09:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=thinkingcat.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J8rBJ1qxWr_k for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 10:09:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from bisque.elm.relay.mailchannels.net (bisque.elm.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.212.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C40E1201AA for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 10:09:47 -0800 (PST) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 156F82C273F; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 18:09:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a34.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-7-4.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.7.4]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 5C3562C29E8; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 18:09:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a34.g.dreamhost.com ([TEMPUNAVAIL]. [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.5); Wed, 05 Feb 2020 18:09:47 +0000 X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Whistle-Lonely: 48c0446e62797be8_1580926186872_3482819443 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1580926186872:2491523413 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1580926186872 Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a34.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a34.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7702A7F1B4; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 10:09:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=thinkingcat.com; h=from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type; s=thinkingcat.com; bh=mLj/n+j7/Yk4uHXtnJFtwU1xwGw =; b=GzoILVOIgKty3sE9IS9UyH2MbfL9ug0hpb3fr6nkrkreZjSCzr/Rlb21ZYs tMKPzJvTqOrYdFp0X80j2DHmVe2HOaBGbyUjZqJleGnE8UOMRLnjniq4fQw6MSfG ZFrlNGnPQwZ1LRSeWJ578IDiaQAObNcvbrZMM3dUhAKB8L44= Received: from [172.21.5.2] (bainbridge.viasat.com [8.37.96.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ldaigle@thinkingcat.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a34.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A15A77F1B2; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 10:09:40 -0800 (PST) X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a34 From: "Leslie Daigle" To: "Kyle Rose" Cc: "Matt Stock" , mops@ietf.org, "Spencer Dawkins at IETF" Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 13:09:17 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <84629438-89A5-4E41-A80D-0DEAA34394F9@thinkingcat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_F2503BA4-FB2E-47A6-B746-794370E8E4CC_=" X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK X-VR-OUT-SCORE: -100 X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrhedugddutdegucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgdpffftgfetoffjqffuvfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvufffoffkjghfgggtsegrtdhmreertdejnecuhfhrohhmpedfnfgvshhlihgvucffrghighhlvgdfuceolhgurghighhlvgesthhhihhnkhhinhhgtggrthdrtghomheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucfkphepkedrfeejrdeliedrfeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhppdhhvghloheplgdujedvrddvuddrhedrvdgnpdhinhgvthepkedrfeejrdeliedrfeegpdhrvghtuhhrnhdqphgrthhhpedfnfgvshhlihgvucffrghighhlvgdfuceolhgurghighhlvgesthhhihhnkhhinhhgtggrthdrtghomheqpdhmrghilhhfrhhomheplhgurghighhlvgesthhhihhnkhhinhhgtggrthdrtghomhdpnhhrtghpthhtoheplhgurghighhlvgesthhhihhnkhhinhhgtggrthdrtghomh Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Mops] Confirming adoption consensus Re: draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 18:09:52 -0000 --=_MailMate_F2503BA4-FB2E-47A6-B746-794370E8E4CC_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On 5 Feb 2020, at 10:40, Kyle Rose wrote: > I think ownership might be covered, at least from a policy = > perspective, by > some text from the git draft (notwithstanding the weaselly use of the > passive voice): > > When an area director or working group chair makes a request to > create a GitHub organization, the following process would be > initiated: > > 1. Create a GitHub organization for the working group. > > 2. Name the organization as ietf-wg- > > 3. Initialize the organization by designating the IETF Secretariat > and the area directors in the working group's area as owners. = > If > the responsible AD for the working group is from another area, > that AD will be an owner as well. > > 4. Initialize the organization with a team that has administrator > access. This team will consist of the working group chairs and > working group secretary, if one exists. > > After the organization is created, the URL for the organization = > would > be added to the working group's page in the Datatracker. > > Steps 3 and 4 above imply that the GitHub identities of the > organization owners and administrators are known. Recording GitHub > identities in the Datatracker (see > ) would > facilitate this. The person requesting the organization would need > to be notified if the GitHub identities of any of the people meant = > to > be owners or administrators were not available. Yeah, I think you=E2=80=99re right, that=E2=80=99s probably the best cove= rage we can = reasonably implement. > > Maybe less inspiring is the wording from the following section, which = > uses > something very close to RFC 6919 "REALLY OUGHT TO" language: > > If a working group already has an organization, it would be useful = > to > be able to make it have the same management as one would get with > going through the steps in Section 2.1 > . > That is, it would be good to > be able to run steps 3 and 4 from Section 2.1 > > so that the rest of the > activities in this section such as personnel work the same for the > organizations that were created on their own. > > I'm inclined to go forward with creating a mops-wg organization on the > assumption that, at worst, we're in the same boat with other WGs using > GitHub, but maybe we should have a consensus call on whether = > participants I think that=E2=80=99s right =E2=80=94 I think we=E2=80=99ve heard suppor= t for it for = documents. If we want to do more than that with the git repo, we can = (should) do a consensus call. As I said =E2=80=94 I don=E2=80=99t want to get in the way of implementin= g tools = people want, and at this point any remaining concerns I have are not = MOPS-specific. Leslie. > want to incorporate an official GitHub org into their workflows. = > Otherwise, > individual document teams are still free use unofficial GitHub repos = > for > revision control and manageability of collaboration, but we would = > probably > need to be more strict about conducting official work on the mailing = > list, > which could negate some of the advantages of using GitHub. > > Kyle > > On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 2:29 PM Leslie Daigle > wrote: > >> Hi Spencer, >> >> On 4 Feb 2020, at 11:04, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: >> >> Hi, Leslie, >> >> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 10:40 PM Leslie Daigle = >> >> wrote: >> >> Spencer, >> >> One thing I=E2=80=99ve been trying to find out is: how to tie a git re= po to = >> the >> IETF. Looking at the CELLAR example, it seems like one just makes the >> assertion that it is the WG git repo? And, it seems odd that there = >> are no >> visible members, let alone owner, of the git repo? >> >> Apologies if I=E2=80=99m missing the obvious. >> >> I don't think you are. >> >> I believe the current state of play is described in >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-05,= >> especially in Section 2.1 and following sections (note that this = >> draft is >> in PUBREQ state, so it's probably mostly right, but hasn't even been >> through AD review yet). Some of the text is input to the tools team, = >> but >> most (selecting organization names, etc.) isn't dependent on = >> datatracker >> support. >> >> Yep, I had read through that. >> >> I believe you are correct that in Github, that's an assertion. In the >> datatracker, co-chairs can add the URL for the organization (I think = >> you >> can just stick this on the working group page now, but apparently = >> there's >> development underway that would allow the datatracker to know that = >> URL is a >> GitHub repository). >> >> That=E2=80=99s a good point =E2=80=94 it leaves it within the IETF=E2=80= =99s purview to = >> identify >> any =E2=80=9Cauthentic=E2=80=9D repo. >> >> I've only been watching CELLAR for a few weeks, so don't know the = >> history >> on defined users, etc. - sorry! >> >> I hope that's helpful. >> >> I=E2=80=99m confident GitHub isn=E2=80=99t going away any time soon, b= ut my = >> general >> concern follows on from the IETF=E2=80=99s experience when everybody h= osted = >> their >> own WG mailing list (federated responsibility! No single point of = >> failure!) >> and archives were lost when people got irritated with the IETF or = >> companies >> went belly-up. >> >> I think it would be good if the IETF had a more persistent role in = >> the >> administration of the git repos, if a group=E2=80=99s work is going to= = >> depend on it. >> >> As a co-chair of MOPS, I don=E2=80=99t want to get in the way of provi= ding = >> a tool >> that current participants actually want to use! But, I also want to = >> make >> sure we use it in a way that is going to stand up to the test of = >> time. >> >> Leslie. >> > > -- = > Mops mailing list > Mops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops -- = ------------------------------------------------------------------- Leslie Daigle Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises ldaigle@thinkingcat.com ------------------------------------------------------------------- --=_MailMate_F2503BA4-FB2E-47A6-B746-794370E8E4CC_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

On 5 Feb 2020, at 10:40, Kyle Rose wrote:

I= think ownership might be covered, at least from a policy perspective, by=
some text from the git draft (notwithstanding the weaselly use of the
= passive voice):

When an area director or working group chair makes a request to
create a GitHub organization, the following process would be
initiated:

1. Create a GitHub organization for the working group.

2. Name the organization as ietf-wg-<wgname>

3. Initialize the organization by designating the IETF Secretariat and the area directors in the working group's area as owners. If<= br> the responsible AD for the working group is from another area,
= that AD will be an owner as well.

4. Initialize the organization with a team that has administrator
= access. This team will consist of the working group chairs and working group secretary, if one exists.

After the organization is created, the URL for the organization would<= br> be added to the working group's page in the Datatracker.

Steps 3 and 4 above imply that the GitHub identities of the
organization owners and administrators are known. Recording GitHub identities in the Datatracker (see
<https://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb/ticket/2548<= /a>>) would
facilitate this. The person requesting the organization would need to be notified if the GitHub identities of any of the people meant to<= br> be owners or administrators were not available.

Yeah, I think you=E2=80=99re right, that=E2=80=99s probab= ly the best coverage we can reasonably implement.

M= aybe less inspiring is the wording from the following section, which uses=
something very close to RFC 6919 "REALLY OUGHT TO" language:

If a working group already has an organization, it would be useful to<= br> be able to make it have the same management as one would get with
going through the steps in Section 2.1
<https://tools.ietf.org/html= /draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-05#section-2.1>.
That is, it would be good to
be able to run steps 3 and 4 from Section 2.1
<https://tools.ietf.org/html= /draft-ietf-git-github-wg-configuration-05#section-2.1>
so that the rest of the
activities in this section such as personnel work the same for the
= organizations that were created on their own.

I'm inclined to go forward with creating a mops-wg organization on the assumption that, at worst, we're in the same boat with other WGs using GitHub, but maybe we should have a consensus call on whether participants=

I think that=E2=80=99s right =E2=80=94 I think we=E2=80=99= ve heard support for it for documents. If we want to do more than that w= ith the git repo, we can (should) do a consensus call.

As I said =E2=80=94 I don=E2=80=99t want to get in the wa= y of implementing tools people want, and at this point any remaining conc= erns I have are not MOPS-specific.

Leslie.

w= ant to incorporate an official GitHub org into their workflows. Otherwise= ,
individual document teams are still free use unofficial GitHub repos for<= br> revision control and manageability of collaboration, but we would probabl= y
need to be more strict about conducting official work on the mailing list= ,
which could negate some of the advantages of using GitHub.

Kyle

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 2:29 PM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com&= gt;
wrote:

Hi Spencer,=

On 4 Feb 2020, at 11:04, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:

Hi, Leslie,

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 10:40 PM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com= >
wrote:

Spencer,

One thing I=E2=80=99ve been trying to find out is: how to tie a git repo = to the
IETF. Looking at the CELLAR example, it seems like one just makes the
= assertion that it is the WG git repo? And, it seems odd that there are no=
visible members, let alone owner, of the git repo?

Apologies if I=E2=80=99m missing the obvious.

I don't think you are.

I believe the current state of play is described in
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-git-= github-wg-configuration-05,
especially in Section 2.1 and following sections (note that this draft is=
in PUBREQ state, so it's probably mostly right, but hasn't even been
through AD review yet). Some of the text is input to the tools team, but<= br> most (selecting organization names, etc.) isn't dependent on datatracker<= br> support.

Yep, I had read through that.

I believe you are correct that in Github, that's an assertion. In the
= datatracker, co-chairs can add the URL for the organization (I think you<= br> can just stick this on the working group page now, but apparently there's=
development underway that would allow the datatracker to know that URL is= a
GitHub repository).

That=E2=80=99s a good point =E2=80=94 it leaves it within the IETF=E2=80=99= s purview to identify
any =E2=80=9Cauthentic=E2=80=9D repo.

I've only been watching CELLAR for a few weeks, so don't know the history=
on defined users, etc. - sorry!

I hope that's helpful.

I=E2=80=99m confident GitHub isn=E2=80=99t going away any time soon, but = my general
concern follows on from the IETF=E2=80=99s experience when everybody host= ed their
own WG mailing list (federated responsibility! No single point of failure= !)
and archives were lost when people got irritated with the IETF or compani= es
went belly-up.

I think it would be good if the IETF had a more persistent role in the administration of the git repos, if a group=E2=80=99s work is going to de= pend on it.

As a co-chair of MOPS, I don=E2=80=99t want to get in the way of providin= g a tool
that current participants actually want to use! But, I also want to make<= br> sure we use it in a way that is going to stand up to the test of time.
Leslie.

<quote trimmed>


--
Mops mailing list
Mops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

--

Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises

ldaigle@thinkingcat.com

--=_MailMate_F2503BA4-FB2E-47A6-B746-794370E8E4CC_=-- From nobody Wed Feb 5 10:14:50 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F1BC12080E for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 10:14:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3_TTR1sQiGXP for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 10:14:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DD9A120805 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 10:14:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122330.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 015I783a020097; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 18:14:45 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=1K3ScyAg5SSp2r4f9/XBwCMt3YSbnpFIauBqBtwMbLI=; b=pHU5qFv+tQCRkSjpwHqOsZW5FYZO0aB4fHANQperem5v1BOqDou1MaOy9s/W7XqFflxa 86JI+W0FASfDxbdykUI+Mvxxdma/yAq5BjL6QkFBzT+7fSHofuQyl1xhhip78B2PeAdr rgBOkTxj1bXrXne4WeLUAmVuqcE1B/up5vE1tjJXK11sOSX2mH1yAXMzZWvGlTvOhUAJ 3TAtcQKb85F7Fq4Y4vPSxzXetJiNrQyFcwl/7s/LACywDjitLvUeAcLre7CazNpeoRTP aAolDqtgAXANqDrnbcnK2PNFfVfDD0A1ldlFmbmDOV1NkPZMh6P1GkRkyLSzQMqJdbzP kw== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint6 (prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com [184.51.33.61] (may be forged)) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2xyhnq3rp0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 05 Feb 2020 18:14:45 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 015I3ALQ017862; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 13:14:44 -0500 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.57]) by prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2xykftrkd1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 05 Feb 2020 13:14:44 -0500 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB5.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.105) by usma1ex-dag3mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.58) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 13:14:43 -0500 Received: from usma1ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.65) by usma1ex-dag1mb5.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.105) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 13:14:43 -0500 Received: from usma1ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.65]) by usma1ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.65]) with mapi id 15.00.1473.005; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 13:14:43 -0500 From: "Holland, Jake" To: Kyle Rose , Leslie Daigle CC: Matt Stock , "mops@ietf.org" , "Spencer Dawkins at IETF" Thread-Topic: [Mops] Confirming adoption consensus Re: draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons Thread-Index: AQHV17Pb98fCJ9xExECqYrjWaqxkbqgEEyYAgAFKfICAAAwVgIAE9YOAgABKWYCAACUigIAAv0AAgAA5FwCAAVKMAP//pPsA Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 18:14:43 +0000 Message-ID: References: <84629438-89A5-4E41-A80D-0DEAA34394F9@thinkingcat.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.21.0.200113 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.80.107] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <77E00EA118AF4E4196DA134B8727EB1B@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2020-02-05_05:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1911140001 definitions=main-2002050139 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-02-05_05:2020-02-04, 2020-02-05 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 clxscore=1011 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2001150001 definitions=main-2002050139 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Mops] Confirming adoption consensus Re: draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 18:14:49 -0000 PkZyb206IEt5bGUgUm9zZSA8a3Jvc2VAa3Jvc2Uub3JnPg0KPkRhdGU6IDIwMjAtMDItMDUgYXQg MDc6NDENCj5TdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW01vcHNdIENvbmZpcm1pbmcgYWRvcHRpb24gY29uc2Vuc3Vz IFJlOiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1vcHMtc3RyZWFtaW5nLW9wY29ucw0KPg0KPkknbSBpbmNsaW5lZCB0 byBnbyBmb3J3YXJkIHdpdGggY3JlYXRpbmcgYSBtb3BzLXdnIG9yZ2FuaXphdGlvbiBvbiB0aGUN Cj5hc3N1bXB0aW9uIHRoYXQsIGF0IHdvcnN0LCB3ZSdyZSBpbiB0aGUgc2FtZSBib2F0IHdpdGgg b3RoZXIgV0dzIHVzaW5nDQo+R2l0SHViLCBidXQgbWF5YmUgd2Ugc2hvdWxkIGhhdmUgYSBjb25z ZW5zdXMgY2FsbCBvbiB3aGV0aGVyIHBhcnRpY2lwYW50cw0KPndhbnQgdG8gaW5jb3Jwb3JhdGUg YW4gb2ZmaWNpYWwgR2l0SHViIG9yZyBpbnRvIHRoZWlyIHdvcmtmbG93cy4NCg0KSSdtIGluIGZh dm9yIG9mIGFuIG9mZmljaWFsIHJlcG8uICBJIHRoaW5rIGl0J3MgY2xlYW5lciB0aGF0IHdheSwg YW5kDQptYWtlcyBpdCBlYXNpZXIgdG8gZmluZCB0aGUgbW9zdCBlZmZpY2llbnQgd2F5IHRvIGNv bnRyaWJ1dGUuDQoNCj5PdGhlcndpc2UsIGluZGl2aWR1YWwgZG9jdW1lbnQgdGVhbXMgYXJlIHN0 aWxsIGZyZWUgdXNlIHVub2ZmaWNpYWwgR2l0SHViDQo+cmVwb3MgZm9yIHJldmlzaW9uIGNvbnRy b2wgYW5kIG1hbmFnZWFiaWxpdHkgb2YgY29sbGFib3JhdGlvbiwgYnV0IHdlIHdvdWxkDQo+cHJv YmFibHkgbmVlZCB0byBiZSBtb3JlIHN0cmljdCBhYm91dCBjb25kdWN0aW5nIG9mZmljaWFsIHdv cmsgb24gdGhlDQo+bWFpbGluZyBsaXN0LCB3aGljaCBjb3VsZCBuZWdhdGUgc29tZSBvZiB0aGUg YWR2YW50YWdlcyBvZiB1c2luZyBHaXRIdWIuDQoNCkhvd2V2ZXIsIEkgZG9uJ3QgdGhpbmsgaXQg cmVkdWNlcyB0aGUgbmVlZCB0byBjb25kdWN0IG9mZmljaWFsIHdvcmsgb24gdGhlDQptYWlsaW5n IGxpc3QuICBJbiBnZW5lcmFsIGEgbG90IG9mIHRoZSBwZW9wbGUgb24gdGhlIGxpc3Qgd29uJ3Qg YmUgZm9sbG93aW5nDQp0aGUgcmVwbywgd2hpY2ggY2FuIGJlIGEgbGl0dGxlIHNwYW1teS4NCg0K QnV0IEkga25vdyBzb21lIHdncyBhcmUgZG9pbmcgc29tZXRoaW5nIHRvIHNlbmQgYSBwZXJpb2Rp YyB1cGRhdGUgdG8gdGhlIGxpc3QNCndoZW4gdGhlcmUgYXJlIHJlcG8gY2hhbmdlcywgd2hpY2gg c2VlbXMgbGlrZSBtYXliZSBhIGdvb2QgaWRlYSB0byBjb3B5LCAoYW5kDQpwZXJoYXBzIHRvIGlu Y29ycG9yYXRlIGludG8gdGhlIGdpdGh1YiB1c2FnZSByZWNvbW1lbmRhdGlvbnMpIGFuZCB3aGlj aCBjb3VsZA0KaGVscCBzb3J0IG9mIGF1dG9tYXRlIG1vc3Qgb2YgdGhlIG9mZmljaWFsIGJ1c2lu ZXNzIHRoYXQgY29tZXMgZnJvbSBlZGl0cyB0bw0KdGhlIGFjdGl2ZSBkb2NzLg0KDQpDaGVlcnMs DQpKYWtlDQoNCg0K From nobody Wed Feb 5 12:54:04 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9CB9120823 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 12:54:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.905 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.905 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_OBFUSCATE_10_20=0.093, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ubwc9IR2Nfst for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 12:53:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf1-x12f.google.com (mail-lf1-x12f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14504120820 for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 12:53:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf1-x12f.google.com with SMTP id n25so2521880lfl.0 for ; Wed, 05 Feb 2020 12:53:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+6gudfZ8N3AsfycrlHfFtOO+6ySm3bNGSYtgep3rJV4=; b=gUQZ9Wj4Z6dGf+O082gRqMDJS3zOykO4XnaqaIa3RmQRhQxSnpmTHLUq/8+zkHECRp IZ405K8l+M2uTuHEenLm3LMA+Qhv/4LiF61daU1mKt18gUGN72VmOmq6kKqKr5nQ3/q+ or3rwEDsLFAlxhZjc9oF7aXI7WDajpzr9voJKJpZgsK8DBh76x7S/cZobYLrHwiKvrw/ quUU74d4wcoZxEi57tjcOvrTcOvbDUW47LesfgaMagbFgBfgguqfY8xxpFVs1n87pw33 +66CGQZwaIsv5P0JCU2T27Tl9LNH44cCy+3C1EIrm+G/gdIthFGqitQOiKCpraIL+xJG WbBA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+6gudfZ8N3AsfycrlHfFtOO+6ySm3bNGSYtgep3rJV4=; b=kDm40Cxlo4x55eyKL1Vt/fhafBzwiSg/TB13LjMV6CQwGBGhsxdcBkC30C42mAo6GD jMkrpFiMQ/Li05fYjnQdEJoQjzHyQ+nmx2morpP6Qs807hT8RNwpieFgpw8g3uiu2WaT /8/+yySHRm+YBYG3VCQ0TECPVMhBROVEJ1E8dz8bWO460SJdvdgxYLDSg0UGOoKOWqIr KpaLPmlheCXk1xRV0Qx2NmK4ybpvZzkTTyvGNXs/+3DvS12niqn9tYfcdtY9ruROAvFS RlDOgdGMXFPpohWW6QayuLJU6Mmy019zj1hOt0WNHrs4HQQWk4Eysbf5SByqBWFpS8Oa LvTA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVttIufAgcQYHmzSCuOGU0WWGuifMXp9mjJVJqsBW8LaNwhHtEg Gaf0p6IhpZlzCxLEcW9Qfc8JlqXfRifykYU6Vzo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz28mlXpf0pmyHsHZeHjl80mEV18Q9o05UE+ObJKbMUOJ0mV/HOqj3Hf/5J2+FX5TnldpvDGpAIfJyuP6G2zk8= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:4c6:: with SMTP id w6mr18670806lfq.157.1580936037112; Wed, 05 Feb 2020 12:53:57 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200112073226.947B93060783@mailuser.nyi.internal> <18937F27-EF78-47A9-A69D-1779F15966AA@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: <18937F27-EF78-47A9-A69D-1779F15966AA@mnot.net> From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 14:53:30 -0600 Message-ID: To: Kyle Rose Cc: mops@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e79cd0059dda5ac3" Archived-At: Subject: [Mops] Fwd: [BOFChairs] Github activity summaries as-a-service X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 20:54:02 -0000 --000000000000e79cd0059dda5ac3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Kyle, I agree with your point about spammy e-mail from Github versus making sure the working group mailing list participants are aware of what's happening in Github. Mark Nottingham sent this note to the working group chairs mailing list not very long ago - I hope it's helpful. Best, Spencer ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Mark Nottingham Date: Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 5:25 PM Subject: [BOFChairs] Github activity summaries as-a-service To: IETF WG Chairs One of the things that people have found helpful inWGs that adopt Git is to have a summary of activity there sent to the WG mailing list periodically; for example, this week's summary for the HTTP WG is forwarded below. I've set up a GitHub repo that sends these, and other WGs can now get summaries sent too. See: https://github.com/ietf-github-services/activity-summary All you need to do to get your repo(s) monitored is submit a Pull Request to update mls.json in that repo, as described in the README. A CI process will check it against the schema to make sure it's correct, and when merged, GitHub Actions will run the summary weekly. Feedback/suggestions/contributions welcome. Cheers, P.S. Note that when sent to IETF mailing lists, a bug < https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/zIm5nasfq1zbyY_wkwwrbFR= 7P5U> rewrites the CSS to make the presentation slightly uglier; hopefully this will be fixed soon, but the mails are still usable. Begin forwarded message: *From: *Repository Activity Summary Bot *Subject: **Weekly github digest (HTTP Activity Summary)* *Date: *12 January 2020 at 6:32:26 pm AEDT *To: *ietf-http-wg@w3.org *Resent-From: *ietf-http-wg@w3.org *Archived-At: *< https://www.w3.org/mid/20200112073226.947B93060783@mailuser.nyi...internal > Sunday January 12, 2020 Events without label "editorial" Issueshttpwg/http-core (+3/-1/=F0=9F=92=AC9) 3 issues created: - #274 need to reserved field name and method name "*" (by reschke) - #273 message field registry migration needs to consider status "reserved" (by reschke) semantics - #272 fix grammar for "Vary" header field (by reschke) semantics 7 issues received 9 new comments: - #274 need to reserve field name and method name "*" (1 by reschke) - #272 fix grammar for "Vary" header field (3 by annevk, reschke) semantics - #136 WWW-Authenticate parsing (1 by reschke) semantic= s - #30 Field-name syntax = (1 by reschke) needs-data semantics - #20 RFC 5789: Content-Location header usage (1 by reschke) semantics - #11 Ranges and Content and Transfer Encoding (1 by reschke) semantics - #7 new header field considerations: list vs keyword (1 by reschke) semantics 1 issues closed: - #20 RFC 5789: Content-Location header usage semantics httpwg/http-extensions (+6/-4/=F0=9F=92=AC33) 6 issues created: - #1027 Key syntax (by mnot) header-structure - #1026 Merging priorities (by martinthomson) priorities - #1023 Semantics for priorities (by martinthomson) priorities - #1022 Coalescing intermediaries and fairness (by martinthomson) priorities - #1021 Reprioritization frames (by martinthomson) priorities - #1020 Deprecate sha-1 (by ioggstream) 9 issues received 33 new comments: - #1026 Merging priorities (8 by LPardue, tombergan, yoavweiss) priorities - #1023 Semantics for priorities (2 by martinthomson, tombergan) priorities - #1021 Reprioritization frames (11 by LPardue, MikeBishop, RyanAtGoogle, martinthomson, tombergan) priorities - #1015 Structured Headers and GREASE (5 by annevk, mikewest, mnot) header-structure - #997 Duplicate Structured Headers fields (1 by mnot) header-structure - #871 Enable Client Hints on first navigation request through HTTPSSVC (1 by yoavweiss) - #718 EAT Cookies (1 by mikewest) 6265bis - #238 Cookies set with or without leading dot in domain attribute (1 by mikewest) 6265bis - #159 Allow cookies without key or value (3 by chlily1, johnwilander, mikewest) 6265bis 4 issues closed: - #159 Allow cookies without key or value 6265bis - #238 Cookies set with or without leading dot in domain attribute 6265bis - #982 Round-tripping float is still hard header-structure - #871 Enable Client Hints on first navigation request through HTTPSSVC Pull requestshttpwg/http-core (+1/-1/=F0=9F=92=AC0) 1 pull requests submitted: - #271 ALPN protocol id IANA reg update for HTTP/1.1 (#49) (by reschke) 1 pull requests merged: - #271 ALPN protocol id IANA reg update for HTTP/1.1 (#49) httpwg/http-extensions (+1/-4/=F0=9F=92=AC7) 1 pull requests submitted: - #1019 Overwrite duplicate dictionary values (by mnot) 6 pull requests received 7 new comments: - #1019 Overwrite duplicate dictionary values (1 by mnot) - #1018 [RFC6265bis] Accept nameless cookies. (2 by mikewest) - #1017 [RFC6265bis, EDITORIAL]: Use `.example` TLD for examples. (1 by mikewest) - #1013 Clarified the ways cookies may be ignored. (1 by mikewest) 6265bis - #1004 Fix: #973. Error response is unrelated to the effective request URI (1 by ioggstream) digest-headers - #776 Add Sec- prefix to security considerations (1 by yoavweiss) client-hints 4 pull requests merged: - #1018 [RFC6265bis] Accept nameless cookies. - #1017 [RFC6265bis, EDITORIAL]: Use `.example` TLD for examples. - #1008 Float -> Decimal - #1011 make #parse-number algorithm fail on bad decimals Repositories tracked by this digest: - https://github.com/httpwg/http-core - https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ _______________________________________________ BOFChairs mailing list BOFChairs@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bofchairs --000000000000e79cd0059dda5ac3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Kyle,=C2=A0

I agree with your point abo= ut spammy e-mail from Github versus making sure the working group mailing l= ist participants are aware of what's happening in Github.=C2=A0

Mark Nottingham sent this note to the working group chair= s mailing list not very long ago - I hope it's helpful.

<= /div>
Best,

Spencer

---------- Forwarded message = ---------
From: Mark Not= tingham <mn= ot@mnot.net>
Date: Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 5:25 PM
Subject= : [BOFChairs] Github activity summaries as-a-service
To: IETF WG Chairs = <wgchairs@ietf.org>


O= ne of the things that people have found helpful inWGs that adopt Git is to = have a summary of activity there sent to the WG mailing list periodically; = for example, this week's summary for the HTTP WG is forwarded below.
I've set up a GitHub repo that sends these, and other = WGs can now get summaries sent too. See:

=
All you need to do to get your repo(s) monitored is submit a Pul= l Request to update mls.json in that repo, as described in the README. A CI= process will check it against the schema to make sure it's correct, an= d when merged, GitHub Actions will run the summary weekly.

Feedback/suggestions/contributions welcome.

Cheers,

P.S. Note that when sent to IETF mailin= g lists, a bug <https://mailarchive.i= etf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/zIm5nasfq1zbyY_wkwwrbFR7P5U> rewrites= the CSS to make the presentation slightly uglier; hopefully this will be f= ixed soon, but the mails are still usable.

Begin forwarded message:

From: Repository Activi= ty Summary Bot <do_not_reply@mnot.net>
Subject: Weekly github digest (HTTP Ac= tivity Summary)
Date: 12 January 2020 at 6:32:26 pm AEDT

Sunday January = 12, 2020

Events without label "editorial"

Issu= es

httpwg/http-core (+3/-1/=F0=9F=92=AC9)

3 issues = created:

7 issues received 9 new comments:

<= ul style=3D"font-family:Gotham,"Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,s= ans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-we= ight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-tra= nsform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none">
  • #274=C2=A0need to reserve field name and method name = "*"=C2=A0(1 by reschke)=C2=A0
    • <= li style=3D"margin-bottom:0.35em">#272=C2=A0fix grammar for "Vary" header= field=C2=A0(3 by annevk, reschke)=C2=A0semantics
  • #136=C2=A0WWW-Authenticate parsing=C2=A0(1 by reschke)=C2= =A0semantics
  • #30=C2=A0Field-name syntax=C2=A0(1 by reschke)=C2=A0needs-data=C2=A0semantics
  • #20=C2=A0RFC 5789: Content-Location header usage=C2=A0(1 by= reschke)=C2=A0semantics
    • <= li style=3D"margin-bottom:0.35em">#11=C2=A0Ranges and Content and Transfer Encoding<= /a>=C2=A0(1 by reschke)=C2=A0semantics
  • #7=C2=A0= new header field= considerations: list vs keyword=C2=A0(1 by reschke)= =C2=A0semantics

    • 1 issues closed:=

    httpwg/http-extensions (+6/-4/=F0=9F=92=AC33)

    6 issues cr= eated:

    9 issues received 33 new comments:

    4 issues closed:

    <= ul style=3D"font-family:Gotham,"Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,s= ans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-we= ight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-tra= nsform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none">
  • #159=C2=A0Allow cookies without key or value=C2=A06265bis
  • #238=C2=A0Cookies set with or without leading dot i= n domain attribute=C2=A06265bis
  • #982=C2=A0Round-tripping float i= s still hard=C2=A0header-structur= e
  • #871=C2=A0Enable Client Hints= on first navigation request through HTTPSSVC

    • Pull requests

    httpwg/http-core (+1/-1/=F0=9F=92=AC0)

    1 pull requests submitted:

    1 pull requests merged:

    httpwg/http-extensions (+1/-4/=F0=9F=92=AC7)

    1 pull reque= sts submitted:

    • #1019=C2=A0Overwrite duplicat= e dictionary values=C2=A0(by mnot)=C2=A0
      • =

    = 6 pull requests received 7 new comments:

    4 pull requests merged:

    R= epositories tracked by this digest:


    =
    --
    Mark Nottingham=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.mnot.net/

    _______________________________________________
    BOFChairs mailing list
    BOFChairs@ietf.org<= /a>
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bofchairs
    --000000000000e79cd0059dda5ac3-- From nobody Mon Feb 10 11:05:24 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50709120251 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:05:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=thinkingcat.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t26JGxrvY-5b for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:05:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from fossa.birch.relay.mailchannels.net (fossa.birch.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.209.62]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8A0C12081E for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:05:21 -0800 (PST) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECC441A09CA; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 19:05:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a70.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-206-172.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.206.172]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 471191A199A; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 19:05:20 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a70.g.dreamhost.com ([TEMPUNAVAIL]. [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.5); Mon, 10 Feb 2020 19:05:20 +0000 X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Cold-Wide-Eyed: 12da863b45d4a77f_1581361520758_1589079352 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1581361520758:3023544398 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1581361520758 Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a70.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a70.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E62557EFEF; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:05:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=thinkingcat.com; h=from:to :subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s= thinkingcat.com; bh=FcSsRC8Ever4nW1loyaevwW5Uxs=; b=s8MHpHkJ65AZ nluCUDgGZTcGipt30ncaZzozSMCm9zKEvX0e/4dc4WhG2IdAIt3+NPNasVOUgAzv CEmaOaZtxFS9gQhr6v92Vl7UnJBha2W8yECiy/xdMEfqAfU7DeCHTCzYKWYnvZZX KTJg9ag1+uVdPiacpSq0tAWLWF+aBLY= Received: from [199.187.223.66] (dhcp-223-66.meetings.nanog.org [199.187.223.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ldaigle@thinkingcat.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a70.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 524AE7EFF9; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:05:12 -0800 (PST) X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a70 From: "Leslie Daigle" To: mops@ietf.org Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 14:04:45 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671) Message-ID: <32D49044-A662-48BE-92D5-22947864F70E@thinkingcat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_1BBAE863-6E27-42A3-BF9D-3513B05F3D82_=" X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK X-VR-OUT-SCORE: 0 X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedriedugdduudduucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgdpffftgfetoffjqffuvfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefhvffufffokfggtgesrgdtmherredtjeenucfhrhhomhepfdfnvghslhhivgcuffgrihhglhgvfdcuoehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmqeenucffohhmrghinhepshhtrhgvrghmihhnghhvihguvghorghllhhirghntggvrdhorhhgnecukfhppeduleelrddukeejrddvvdefrdeiieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhhouggvpehsmhhtphdphhgvlhhopegludelledrudekjedrvddvfedrieeingdpihhnvghtpeduleelrddukeejrddvvdefrdeiiedprhgvthhurhhnqdhprghthhepfdfnvghslhhivgcuffgrihhglhgvfdcuoehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmqedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmpdhnrhgtphhtthhopehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhm Archived-At: Subject: [Mops] News: Protocols in deployment X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 19:05:23 -0000 --=_MailMate_1BBAE863-6E27-42A3-BF9D-3513B05F3D82_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed; markup=markdown Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This is a bit of news out of the Streaming Video Alliance =E2=80=94 as Vi= asat = has announced its latest streaming video service rollout, which makes = use of SVA=E2=80=99s OpenCaching. Key thing for the IETF =E2=80=94 recall OpenCaching is heavily reliant on= = CDNI. This stuff is happening, and important in the Internet=E2=80=99s use. Le= t=E2=80=99s = help make sure coordination continues! By way of concrete reference, not that I am a fan of press releases by = any stretch of the imagination (i.e., read at your own risk ;-) ): https://www.streamingvideoalliance.org/2020/02/06/viasat-brings-streaming= -video-alliance-open-caching-technology-to-life-with-fubotv/ Leslie. -- = ------------------------------------------------------------------- Leslie Daigle Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises ldaigle@thinkingcat.com ------------------------------------------------------------------- --=_MailMate_1BBAE863-6E27-42A3-BF9D-3513B05F3D82_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    This is a bit of news out of the Streaming Video Alliance= =E2=80=94 as Viasat has announced its latest streaming video service rol= lout, which makes use of SVA=E2=80=99s OpenCaching.

    Key thing for the IETF =E2=80=94 recall OpenCaching is he= avily reliant on CDNI.

    This stuff is happening, and important in the Internet=E2= =80=99s use. Let=E2=80=99s help make sure coordination continues!

    By way of concrete reference, not that I am a fan of pres= s releases by any stretch of the imagination (i.e., read at your own risk= ;-) ):

    https://www.streamingvideoallianc= e.org/2020/02/06/viasat-brings-streaming-video-alliance-open-caching-tech= nology-to-life-with-fubotv/

    Leslie.

    --

    Leslie Daigle
    Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises

    ldaigle@thinkingcat.com

    --=_MailMate_1BBAE863-6E27-42A3-BF9D-3513B05F3D82_=-- From nobody Thu Feb 13 17:08:27 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietf.org Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F02E5120020; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 17:08:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: mops@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.117.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: mops@ietf.org Message-ID: <158164250270.20560.1174892893384079197@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 17:08:22 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Mops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons-00.txt X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 01:08:23 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Media OPerationS WG of the IETF. Title : Operational Considerations for Streaming Media Authors : Jake Holland Ali Begen Spencer Dawkins Filename : draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons-00.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2020-02-13 Abstract: This document provides an overview of operational networking issues that pertain to quality of experience in delivery of video and other high-bitrate media over the internet. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons-00 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons-00 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 nobody Mon Feb 17 18:48:23 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E161E120052 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 13:11:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tzEuWGQWrTcM for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 13:11:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lj1-x22f.google.com (mail-lj1-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2AE6120864 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 13:11:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-x22f.google.com with SMTP id a13so20430689ljm.10 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 13:11:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=LQgEifoHZzmtGmNiZFnLfhfCNt3ilSBnpZBcKD+MQfQ=; b=cmiALwgHFKKGavtpHwQq5y6B7m/QP04TGEJj/7X9sGsmAjF9PzCNKmSCOB43OZ71UU eZOfDpuId9iM5ybRFl1BttMzNu9+TEligLV/68c18WFnWWTVXUjvg2bS67au/R1DHjFt EncBTDZkGXrsW71Xs7kehNxWhBcqButEqcMkQzbIbdMu7QXVusGMjUg5+r96yr506p1r VI5xbZgvQ6NzLIAtYI+fFoTfgtr9yr76Hlxld5vT7yX4O/7XQQmr7Wtc8rUmV1UNz5Bu L6ue32d6gopRLY0l2R+HnTORMejoJaRFW8gcqymXmoloC7cOLLI++M+7thp8X6XoP3Cc TWTQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=LQgEifoHZzmtGmNiZFnLfhfCNt3ilSBnpZBcKD+MQfQ=; b=Mb2mWvDOY8bxsobRrROXYiJ9c7kaD/t7bijzf1FEsD5+iOo45i1P6/KfkYqZiiB7Ao htd/5ELR1eXg9xF3daBxh1LCQYEnwUibOQ6so6WiiytIzXZwnzFQUZcxsZVgfsBirolF u5wUGfbjIeCuvSUqZL7qs5WekAUHbh8iCEXpufiLhQl+TYLqjoxRUec8hjiCtlYrhznj IPTf4cE6Xzou++hE2Xu3uZN6KRzhDmbGEHfJtcXUkGEFHTZ70o/p0aL94xiubcLH12oI Y0u9k5d7QsQ1uY3baFMui/cQcgLm2xr3V8wDSCw2qEX7E+uZZlLNituCtNv4zbYJfDpl nk1g== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXZ9JpoFXO9bqo77/eVjcLrydMMq16OkJ/JPEhw3jNys1p3nmU3 pW2k98NQHRuLOUAvyKNMbTAxckqelapdUwhPVsMgpt1+9GA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyP/8ZPk42ZcXwCCU7XCNAV3DmAN/Ijmj6RO4CD0IBRJlAXpMLIzpTZpD7hC2BKNpomOr1H5n9wMDFCuho2dLk= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b5b4:: with SMTP id f20mr11239257ljn.112.1581973898514; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 13:11:38 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 15:11:11 -0600 Message-ID: To: mops@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000043d556059ecc001b" Archived-At: Subject: [Mops] Please note: added to X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 21:11:43 -0000 --00000000000043d556059ecc001b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Dear MOPS, We added this paragraph to https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons-00, so that it will be easier for people to contribute to this draft (now adopted by the working group). 1.1. Venues for Contribution and Discussion Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section before publication (To the editor: check this repository URL after the draft is adopted. The working group may create its own repository) This document is in the Github repository at https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts. Readers are welcome to open issues and send pull requests for this document. Substantial discussion of this document should take place on the MOPS working group mailing list (mops@ietf.org). We're kind of speaking for the chairs here (minor stuff goes as issues in Github, substantial discussion goes on this mailing list), and wanted to call their attention to this - if the chairs would like for this section to say something else, please let us know. Best, Spencer --00000000000043d556059ecc001b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Dear MOPS,

    We added this paragraph to= =C2=A0https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mops-stre= aming-opcons-00, so that it will be easier for people to contribute to = this draft (now adopted by the working group).

    1.1= .=C2=A0 Venues for Contribution and Discussion

    =C2=A0 =C2=A0Note to = RFC Editor: Please remove this section before publication

    =C2=A0 =C2= =A0(To the editor: check this repository URL after the draft is adopted.=C2=A0 =C2=A0The working group may create its own repository)

    =C2= =A0 =C2=A0This document is in the Github repository at
    =C2=A0 =C2=A0https://github.c= om/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts.=C2=A0 Readers are
    =C2=A0 =C2=A0w= elcome to open issues and send pull requests for this document.

    =C2= =A0 =C2=A0Substantial discussion of this document should take place on the = MOPS
    =C2=A0 =C2=A0working group mailing list (mops@ietf.org).

    We're kind of s= peaking for the chairs here (minor stuff goes as issues in Github, substant= ial discussion goes on this mailing list), and wanted to call their attenti= on to this - if the chairs would like for this section to say something els= e, please let us know.

    Best,

    <= div>Spencer
    --00000000000043d556059ecc001b-- From nobody Tue Feb 18 08:43:48 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBDC7120077 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 08:43:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=thinkingcat.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1TefDMrEqRKE for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 08:43:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from dragonfly.birch.relay.mailchannels.net (dragonfly.birch.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.209.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 016F7120020 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 08:43:43 -0800 (PST) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D92C9360778; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 16:43:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a100.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-1-6.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.1.6]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 5622F360C19; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 16:43:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a100.g.dreamhost.com ([TEMPUNAVAIL]. [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.5); Tue, 18 Feb 2020 16:43:42 +0000 X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Stop-Bottle: 405d52b5396b56f7_1582044222556_793927815 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1582044222556:1405947389 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1582044222555 Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a100.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a100.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23438B230F; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 08:43:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=thinkingcat.com; h=from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=thinkingcat.com; bh=Z xO8fYV87mpWL4FWD42GF+oUVk0=; b=jM/3von/DcTAqv++w7aaajWOGkZzGJpnP XA7s4TKkS6wi+gJQHN3PbvuRJ9clPKutzB7g0lD/BnQI/Yih3GFdfxIuuO5U5WW7 1XXL8DwxqIfPAK4sxAQ/NwitskXcouxTzWKoYn7k39Z3KizJ9uQYLN53K7qACEsl wN7dbHMUrw= Received: from [192.168.1.57] (vtelinet-216-66-102-83.vermontel.net [216.66.102.83]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ldaigle@thinkingcat.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a100.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D35A0B22FE; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 08:43:32 -0800 (PST) X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a100 From: "Leslie Daigle" To: "Spencer Dawkins at IETF" Cc: mops@ietf.org Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 11:42:56 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671) Message-ID: <93C2EE31-59CD-4830-B13B-85241098038D@thinkingcat.com> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_56590E6B-9AB3-47B2-BE0F-0DA4240C5047_=" Embedded-HTML: [{"HTML":[999, 1488], "plain":[387, 1090], "uuid":"9CD9DBDF-566E-4B5E-9C7B-6F2244C5945D"}] X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK X-VR-OUT-SCORE: -100 X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrjeekgdeludcutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfftffgtefojffquffvnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpefhvffufffokfgjfhggtgfgsegrkehmreertdejnecuhfhrohhmpedfnfgvshhlihgvucffrghighhlvgdfuceolhgurghighhlvgesthhhihhnkhhinhhgtggrthdrtghomheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghdpghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecukfhppedvudeirdeiiedruddtvddrkeefnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhppdhhvghloheplgduledvrdduieekrddurdehjegnpdhinhgvthepvdduiedrieeirddutddvrdekfedprhgvthhurhhnqdhprghthhepfdfnvghslhhivgcuffgrihhglhgvfdcuoehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmqedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmpdhnrhgtphhtthhopehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhm Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Mops] Please note: added to X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 16:43:47 -0000 --=_MailMate_56590E6B-9AB3-47B2-BE0F-0DA4240C5047_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, [You wrote:] > We're kind of speaking for the chairs here (minor stuff goes as issues=20 > in Github, substantial discussion goes on this mailing list), and=20 > wanted to call their attention to this - if the chairs would like for=20 > this section to say something else, please let us know. It=E2=80=99s fine by me, as one chair. Leslie. On 17 Feb 2020, at 16:11, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: > Dear MOPS, > > We added this paragraph to > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons-= 00, > so that it will be easier for people to contribute to this draft (now > adopted by the working group). > > 1.1. Venues for Contribution and Discussion > > Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section before publication > > (To the editor: check this repository URL after the draft is=20 > adopted. > The working group may create its own repository) > > This document is in the Github repository at > https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts. Readers are > welcome to open issues and send pull requests for this document. > > Substantial discussion of this document should take place on the=20 > MOPS > working group mailing list (mops@ietf.org). > > We're kind of speaking for the chairs here (minor stuff goes as issues=20 > in > Github, substantial discussion goes on this mailing list), and wanted=20 > to > call their attention to this - if the chairs would like for this=20 > section to > say something else, please let us know. > > Best, > > Spencer > --=20 > Mops mailing list > Mops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops --=20 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Leslie Daigle Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises ldaigle@thinkingcat.com ------------------------------------------------------------------- --=_MailMate_56590E6B-9AB3-47B2-BE0F-0DA4240C5047_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    Hi,

    [You wrote:]

    W= e're kind of speaking for the chairs here (minor stuff goes as issues in = Github, substantial discussion goes on this mailing list), and wanted to = call their attention to this - if the chairs would like for this section = to say something else, please let us know.

    It=E2=80=99s fine by me, as one chair.

    Leslie.

    On 17 Feb 2020, at 16:11, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:<= /p>

    Dear MOPS,

    We added this paragraph to=C2= =A0https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mops-str= eaming-opcons-00, so that it will be easier for people to contribute = to this draft (now adopted by the working group).

    1.1..=C2=A0 Venues for Contribution and Discussion

    =C2=A0 =C2=A0= Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section before publication

    = =C2=A0 =C2=A0(To the editor: check this repository URL after the draft is= adopted.
    =C2=A0 =C2=A0The working group may create its own repository= )

    =C2=A0 =C2=A0This document is in the Github repository at
    =C2= =A0 =C2=A0= https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts.=C2=A0 Readers are=
    =C2=A0 =C2=A0welcome to open issues and send pull requests for this d= ocument.

    =C2=A0 =C2=A0Substantial discussion of this document shou= ld take place on the MOPS
    =C2=A0 =C2=A0working group mailing list (mops@ietf.org).

    We're kind of speaking for the chairs here (minor stuff goes as= issues in Github, substantial discussion goes on this mailing list), and= wanted to call their attention to this - if the chairs would like for th= is section to say something else, please let us know.

    Best,

    Spencer

    --
    Mops mailing list
    Mops@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

    --

    Leslie Daigle
    Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises

    ldaigle@thinkingcat.com

    --=_MailMate_56590E6B-9AB3-47B2-BE0F-0DA4240C5047_=-- From nobody Wed Feb 19 05:29:14 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1319E120073 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 05:29:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=krose.org Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ezxAposKsvb1 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 05:29:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yb1-xb2b.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0249812004F for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 05:29:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yb1-xb2b.google.com with SMTP id j78so210647ybg.12 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 05:29:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=krose.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=osvNofbPfkchlECNVC6Qn5pwgHLWG85YeZ+S4PDDnPY=; b=qdeidEDo+rH8K/i+LowGHy9b5GamRWXSSMhiujh6bOcFXOgDQP/NXxn4AIkQMAyZDi R+kDSmdbKQQ3nlXo5VfmX0yRxb4vAIl1w/tlHG9FUayfm4+wLy7lrFoP9KJkqt1+pVBt 9ctDKoSHQEIUCr17aGk8H8Iv73vASkwWypKH4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=osvNofbPfkchlECNVC6Qn5pwgHLWG85YeZ+S4PDDnPY=; b=AEfbLi0yZ/7R5NTKtZu7cAyqDOoTlAxLsbOHZpVkaiJ4Z+OXFzI96ICOOO/ti9Yx9T 8tktg/k3st1ZWODVDmmZ6Ih/g2ZaSdPYkteICA6Q+8mOdHxwuMEewZE2qfO7Cy6dnQhW NARuhmpkRKGi9onRZuM0HGnjdjFnwrKaV76oxY60DGrvfanrFjsqs43vfaloXvPqmCeL PNEF+Zv9YVMRy3WfilhTHfc8H3tXrgE7dNWajb2xWmFpbvxzHBqX3DqWC3agUp5JhOIR voIb2wSjSMXTFeSUMiRF4fxa9ERuT2vVeeVF/9+msb3WyXZg+d8vJHdfzGhxaBC6O/jn yn+g== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUgVZYWJbnHnOG+sDLDgqfu1lYc4IrYV5UWuoaG6uLU2yY5G249 O+9r671m58cxjrT+S00fq8JqItWkMaKNPadOT5Dw2g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxxyqgkXIfW0QW8Bfw6BvDc2FysRkPL3gvh51gyin4wjgb1Y80OxX6qdM3ATahbbr/XjpSDBeXtt+6EVLdOHts= X-Received: by 2002:a5b:b:: with SMTP id a11mr6542447ybp.396.1582118944880; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 05:29:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <93C2EE31-59CD-4830-B13B-85241098038D@thinkingcat.com> In-Reply-To: <93C2EE31-59CD-4830-B13B-85241098038D@thinkingcat.com> From: Kyle Rose Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 08:28:53 -0500 Message-ID: To: Leslie Daigle Cc: Spencer Dawkins at IETF , mops@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b3d1cf059eedc5a5" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Mops] Please note: added to X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 13:29:12 -0000 --000000000000b3d1cf059eedc5a5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable SGTM. Kyle On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 11:43 AM Leslie Daigle wrote: > Hi, > > [You wrote:] > > We're kind of speaking for the chairs here (minor stuff goes as issues in > Github, substantial discussion goes on this mailing list), and wanted to > call their attention to this - if the chairs would like for this section = to > say something else, please let us know. > > It=E2=80=99s fine by me, as one chair. > > Leslie. > > On 17 Feb 2020, at 16:11, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: > > Dear MOPS, > > We added this paragraph to > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons-00= , > so that it will be easier for people to contribute to this draft (now > adopted by the working group). > > 1.1.. Venues for Contribution and Discussion > > Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this section before publication > > (To the editor: check this repository URL after the draft is adopted. > The working group may create its own repository) > > This document is in the Github repository at > https://github.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts. Readers are > welcome to open issues and send pull requests for this document. > > Substantial discussion of this document should take place on the MOPS > working group mailing list (mops@ietf.org). > > We're kind of speaking for the chairs here (minor stuff goes as issues in > Github, substantial discussion goes on this mailing list), and wanted to > call their attention to this - if the chairs would like for this section = to > say something else, please let us know. > > Best, > > Spencer > > -- > Mops mailing list > Mops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops > > -- > ------------------------------ > > Leslie Daigle > Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises > ldaigle@thinkingcat.com > -- > Mops mailing list > Mops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops > --000000000000b3d1cf059eedc5a5 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    SGT= M.

    Kyle
    On Tue, = Feb 18, 2020 at 11:43 AM Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com> wrote:

    Hi,

    [You wrote:]

    We're kind of speaking for the chairs here (minor s= tuff goes as issues in Github, substantial discussion goes on this mailing = list), and wanted to call their attention to this - if the chairs would lik= e for this section to say something else, please let us know.

    It=E2=80=99s fine by me, as one chair.

    Leslie.

    On 17 Feb 2020, at 16:11, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:

    Dear MOPS,
    We added this paragraph to=C2=A0https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons-= 00, so that it will be easier for people to contribute to this draft (n= ow adopted by the working group).

    1.1..=C2=A0 Venu= es for Contribution and Discussion

    =C2=A0 =C2=A0Note to RFC Editor: = Please remove this section before publication

    =C2=A0 =C2=A0(To the e= ditor: check this repository URL after the draft is adopted.
    =C2=A0 =C2= =A0The working group may create its own repository)

    =C2=A0 =C2=A0Thi= s document is in the Github repository at
    =C2=A0 =C2=A0https://git= hub.com/GrumpyOldTroll/ietf-mops-drafts.=C2=A0 Readers are
    =C2=A0 = =C2=A0welcome to open issues and send pull requests for this document.
    <= br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0Substantial discussion of this document should take place o= n the MOPS
    =C2=A0 =C2=A0working group mailing list (mops@ietf.org).

    =
    We're kind of speaking for the chairs here (minor stuff goes as is= sues in Github, substantial discussion goes on this mailing list), and want= ed to call their attention to this - if the chairs would like for this sect= ion to say something else, please let us know.

    Bes= t,

    Spencer
    --
    Mops mailing list
    Mops@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops
    --000000000000b3d1cf059eedc5a5-- From nobody Fri Feb 28 14:37:55 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mops@ietf.org Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBAAE3A1F73; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 14:35:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "\"IETF Secretariat\"" To: , Cc: evyncke@cisco.com, mops@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.119.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <158292931575.19931.13290166238774922867@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 14:35:15 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Mops] mops - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 107 X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: Media OPerationS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 22:35:22 -0000 Dear Leslie Daigle, The session(s) that you have requested have been scheduled. Below is the scheduled session information followed by the original request. mops Session 1 (1:30 requested) Wednesday, 25 March 2020, Afternoon Session I 1330-1500 Room Name: Regency D size: 300 --------------------------------------------- iCalendar: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/107/sessions/mops.ics Request Information: --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: Media OPerationS Area Name: Operations and Management Area Session Requester: Leslie Daigle Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 1.5 Hours Number of Attendees: 100 Conflicts to Avoid: Technology Overlap: quic cdni mboned pim mmusic httpbis doh taps dnssd hip homenet dprive Key Participant Conflict: tsvwg People who must be present: Eric Vyncke Leslie Daigle Kyle Rose Resources Requested: Special Requests: Additionally, we want to avoid APN if it gets scheduled. And, a key participant has to leave on Wednesday evening for family reasons. So, we would appreciate being scheduled on Mon, Tue or Wed. ---------------------------------------------------------