Skip to main content

IETF conflict review for draft-irtf-samrg-common-api
conflict-review-irtf-samrg-common-api-03

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2022-12-08
03 Cindy Morgan Notification list changed to lars@netapp.com, draft-irtf-samrg-common-api@tools.ietf.org, ​buford@samrg.org from "Lars Eggert" <lars@netapp.com>, draft-irtf-samrg-common-api@tools.ietf.org, ​buford@samrg.org
2013-10-14
03 Amy Vezza
The following approval message was sent
From: The IESG
To: "Lars Eggert" , draft-irtf-samrg-common-api@tools.ietf.org, ​buford@samrg.org
Cc: The IESG , , 
Subject: Results of …
The following approval message was sent
From: The IESG
To: "Lars Eggert" , draft-irtf-samrg-common-api@tools.ietf.org, ​buford@samrg.org
Cc: The IESG , , 
Subject: Results of IETF-conflict review for draft-irtf-samrg-common-api-10

The IESG has completed a review of draft-irtf-samrg-common-api-10
consistent with RFC5742.


The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'A Common API for
Transparent Hybrid Multicast'  as an
Experimental RFC.


The IESG has concluded that there is no conflict between this document
and IETF work.

The IESG would also like the IRTF to review the comments in the
datatracker related to this document and determine whether or not they
merit incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the
ballot and the history log.

The IESG review is documented at:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/conflict-review-irtf-samrg-common-api/

A URL of the reviewed Internet Draft is:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-samrg-common-api/

The process for such documents is described at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html

Thank you,

The IESG Secretary



2013-10-14
03 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the conflict review response
2013-10-14
03 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2013-10-14
03 Amy Vezza State changed to Approved No Problem - announcement sent from Approved No Problem - announcement to be sent
2013-10-10
03 Cindy Morgan State changed to Approved No Problem - announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation
2013-10-10
03 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Sean Turner
2013-10-10
03 Gonzalo Camarillo [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Gonzalo Camarillo
2013-10-10
03 Stephen Farrell [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Stephen Farrell
2013-10-10
03 Joel Jaeggli [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Joel Jaeggli
2013-10-09
03 Ted Lemon [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ted Lemon
2013-10-09
03 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Jari Arkko
2013-10-09
03 Pete Resnick [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Pete Resnick
2013-10-09
03 Stewart Bryant [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Stewart Bryant
2013-10-08
03 Richard Barnes [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Richard Barnes
2013-10-08
03 Martin Stiemerling [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Martin Stiemerling
2013-10-07
03 Spencer Dawkins [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Spencer Dawkins
2013-10-07
03 Adrian Farrel [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Adrian Farrel
2013-10-04
03 Barry Leiba
[Ballot comment]
Once again, thanks very much to the document authors for working with me on the URI issues.  They have been resolved, and this …
[Ballot comment]
Once again, thanks very much to the document authors for working with me on the URI issues.  They have been resolved, and this version is, indeed, ready to publish in the IRTF stream.
2013-10-04
03 Barry Leiba [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Barry Leiba
2013-10-04
03 Brian Haberman [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Brian Haberman
2013-10-04
03 Brian Haberman Created "Approve" ballot
2013-10-04
03 Brian Haberman State changed to IESG Evaluation from AD Review
2013-10-04
03 Brian Haberman Telechat date has been changed to 2013-10-10 from 2013-05-30
2013-10-04
03 Brian Haberman New version available: conflict-review-irtf-samrg-common-api-03.txt
2013-10-04
02 Brian Haberman New version available: conflict-review-irtf-samrg-common-api-02.txt
2013-10-04
01 Brian Haberman State changed to AD Review from Approved Request to Not Publish - announcement sent
2013-06-03
01 Amy Vezza
The following approval message was sent
From: The IESG
To: "Lars Eggert" , draft-irtf-samrg-common-api@tools.ietf.org, ​buford@samrg.org
Cc: The IESG , , 
Subject: Results of …
The following approval message was sent
From: The IESG
To: "Lars Eggert" , draft-irtf-samrg-common-api@tools.ietf.org, ​buford@samrg.org
Cc: The IESG , , 
Subject: Results of IETF-conflict review for draft-irtf-samrg-common-api-08

The IESG has completed a review of draft-irtf-samrg-common-api-08
consistent with RFC5742.


The IESG recommends that 'A Common API for Transparent Hybrid Multicast'
NOT be published as an Experimental
RFC.


The IESG has concluded that this document extends an IETF protocol in a
way that requires IETF review and should therefore not be published
without IETF review and IESG approval.

IESG NOTE:

Specifically, the document appears to propose incompatible extensions
to URIs: using URIs with unregistered schemes (ip: and sha-2:, for
example) and using registered schemes, such as sip: and reload:, in
ways they were not intended to be used and that deployed software
would not support.

This document seems to be overloading URIs to make them serve as
multicast group names, and overloading URI schemes to serve as
namespaces in the proposed SAM system.  Having identifiers that look
like URIs but have different semantics and are used in different ways,
is a very bad approach and is likely to cause serious breakage as
those identifiers become intermixed with and indistinguishable from
true URIs that applications expect to dereference.

The IESG would also like the IRTF to review the comments in the
datatracker related to this document and determine whether or not they
merit incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the
ballot and the history log.

The IESG review is documented at:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/conflict-review-irtf-samrg-common-api/

A URL of the reviewed Internet Draft is:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-samrg-common-api/

The process for such documents is described at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html

Thank you,

The IESG Secretary



2013-06-03
01 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the conflict review response
2013-06-03
01 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2013-06-03
01 Amy Vezza State changed to Approved Request to Not Publish - announcement sent from Approved Request to Not Publish - announcement to be sent
2013-05-30
01 Cindy Morgan State changed to Approved Request to Not Publish - announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation
2013-05-30
01 Joel Jaeggli [Ballot Position Update] Position for Joel Jaeggli has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2013-05-30
01 Richard Barnes [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Richard Barnes
2013-05-30
01 Ted Lemon [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Ted Lemon
2013-05-30
01 Gonzalo Camarillo [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Gonzalo Camarillo
2013-05-30
01 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Sean Turner
2013-05-30
01 Stephen Farrell [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Stephen Farrell
2013-05-29
01 Stewart Bryant [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Stewart Bryant
2013-05-29
01 Martin Stiemerling [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Martin Stiemerling
2013-05-29
01 Benoît Claise [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Benoit Claise
2013-05-28
01 Spencer Dawkins [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Spencer Dawkins
2013-05-28
01 Joel Jaeggli
[Ballot discuss]
I don't see this as a problem to be addressed necessarily but I'd like to discuss it.

Overlay/encapsulation/upper -layer multicast applications fundamentally have …
[Ballot discuss]
I don't see this as a problem to be addressed necessarily but I'd like to discuss it.

Overlay/encapsulation/upper -layer multicast applications fundamentally have no recourse to congestion control yet they they exist because the infrastructure to support (lower layer) multicast does not on among other things the general internet. We assume for the sake of argument (shallowly I believe) that organizations using native multicast transport know what they're doing but the same does not apply imho to overlays or upper layer multicast.

this is a problem that the iesg consider a liability with:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mboned-auto-multicast

that I don't think is entirely mollified by the research nature of of the publication.
2013-05-28
01 Joel Jaeggli [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded for Joel Jaeggli
2013-05-28
01 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Jari Arkko
2013-05-26
01 Adrian Farrel
[Ballot comment]
I think this is the right conflict review response.

Reading the document, I am slightly confused: this work, which says that it is …
[Ballot comment]
I think this is the right conflict review response.

Reading the document, I am slightly confused: this work, which says that it is most efficient to handle multicast at the lowest layer possible, seems to stop at the IP layer. Why do you not consider lower layers as well? Or perhaps add the word "Packet" to the title etc.
2013-05-26
01 Adrian Farrel [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Adrian Farrel
2013-05-22
01 Pete Resnick [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Pete Resnick
2013-05-22
01 Barry Leiba [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Barry Leiba
2013-05-22
01 Brian Haberman New version available: conflict-review-irtf-samrg-common-api-01.txt
2013-05-22
00 Brian Haberman Removed telechat returning item indication
2013-05-22
00 Brian Haberman Telechat date has been changed to 2013-05-30 from 2013-05-16
2013-05-22
00 Brian Haberman [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Brian Haberman
2013-05-22
00 Brian Haberman Created "Approve" ballot
2013-05-22
00 Brian Haberman State changed to IESG Evaluation from AD Review
2013-05-22
00 Brian Haberman New version available: conflict-review-irtf-samrg-common-api-00.txt
2013-05-16
00 Cindy Morgan State changed to AD Review from Needs Shepherd
2013-05-16
00 Cindy Morgan Shepherding AD changed to Brian Haberman
2013-05-07
00 Cindy Morgan
Hi, IESG secretary (BCC'ed),

this is a request for the IESG to perform an RFC5742 review of draft-irtf-samrg-common-api-08 from the SAMRG, to be published as …
Hi, IESG secretary (BCC'ed),

this is a request for the IESG to perform an RFC5742 review of draft-irtf-samrg-common-api-08 from the SAMRG, to be published as an Experimental RFC on the IRTF Stream.

This document has been approved for publication by the IRSG. See http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/group/irtf/trac/ticket/50 for details on prior reviews. Please copy all correspondence to the document shepherd, John Buford (​buford@samrg.org).

Thanks,
Lars
2013-05-07
00 Cindy Morgan Placed on agenda for telechat - 2013-05-16
2013-05-07
00 Cindy Morgan IETF conflict review requested