W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: Status of working group last call on BIND

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2005 00:16:59 +0100
Message-ID: <4204026B.1070104@gmx.de>
To: Joe Hildebrand <jhildebrand@jabber.com>
CC: webdav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>

Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> 
> Please send a note to the list if you reviewed BIND for the last call.
> I'd like to make sure we had enough eyes on it.
> 
> If there are any outstanding issues that, for whatever reason, didn't 
> make it into Bugzilla, please enter them ASAP.  I've seen a couple go by 
> on the list that I don't see in the system.
> 
> Here is a list of the issues I see on bugzilla.
> 
> ---
> http://ietf.webdav.org:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
> "Bindings needs to completely describe how bindings interact with
> locks."
> 
> I see consensus for the clarification text proposed and wordsmithed here
> on the list.
> 
> ---
> http://ietf.webdav.org:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
> "Bindings and DeltaV aren't fully interspecified"
> 
> Of the text I've seen for this, that says that the interaction is
> unspecified, I don't see enough consensus on that suggestion to hold
> things up.
> 
> ---
> http://ietf.webdav.org:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71
> "Clarify what servers may and may not do with privileges when BIND is
> used"
> 
> I don't see consensus for making a change.  However, I want to make sure 
> I understand the issue before I predict how the IESG will react to this 
> during their last call.  I'll post a message to the list with some 
> thoughts.

Thanks Joe,

from my p.o.v.:

#2) Should be closed: consensus for the change made with 
<http://www.webdav.org/bind/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-latest.html#rfc.issue.2.7_unlock_vs_bindings>

#5) Should be closed: has 0 votes on it

#71) Should be closed: has only 1 vote on it from Elias, and he's 
satisfied with the explanations and changes made 
(<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2005JanMar/0163.html>).

#71b) The question raised by you, Joe, in 
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2005JanMar/0165.html> 
is IMHO a distinct issue, it's being tracked with 
<http://www.webdav.org/bind/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-latest.html#rfc.issue.9_ns_op_and_acl>, 
you may want to open a new BugZilla issue if you feel that there's a 
risk that we're not following up properly.


Regarding the three issues raised post-last-call: please give guidance 
on how to proceed. So far, there aren't any votes on them, and it 
doesn't seem any new feedback is coming in. I think we still should plan 
to submit a document for publication in time before the IETF, which is 
roughly two weeks from now.


Best regards, Julian


-- 
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Friday, 4 February 2005 23:17:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:07 GMT