Hi Al, Warren, all, Have just published -16 of manageability containing these and other PRs (and -16 of applicability, which adds only last call review acks).
I think we’re ready to go the IESG now. Thanks, cheers, Brian > On 5 Apr 2022, at 23:32, MORTON JR., AL <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Warren Kumari <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: Tuesday, April 5, 2022 1:00 PM > To: Brian Trammell <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Cc: MORTON JR., AL <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Gorry > Fairhurst <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; Paul Vixie <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>; Mirja Kuehlewind > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Lucas > Pardue <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; QUIC > WG <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: Re: [OPS-DIR] Opsdir last call review of > draft-ietf-quic-manageability-14 > > Hi Brian, Al, Mirja, et al, > > Just a quick note to say thank you to all for this conversation and working > towards some sort of consensus. > > I personally think that the PRs that Brian has created are helpful, and are > looking good. There is a definite, and ongoing tension between the operators' > need to see into the traffic for management/filtering/malware protection/etc; > and the users' needs for privacy - this tension makes these sorts of > discussions somewhat fraught, and I'd like to thank everyone again for trying > to see each other's viewpoints, and work towards text / a solution that we > can all live with. > > While this compromise might not be perfect, is it good enough that we can all > live with it? > W > [acm] > WFM, thanks, > Al > > > > On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 7:04 AM, Brian Trammell <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Hi Al, Lucas, all, > > I think I’ve distilled down this thread into two PRs: > https://github.com/quicwg/ops-drafts/pull/466 > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/github.com/quicwg/ops-drafts/pull/466__;!!BhdT!ja5YmdO4uaBZJglvL3utBGoizA3beR66DhMXcTXFI3U9srTnu6td0NOfpRKI_PKDB6jYUaOgoBb1$> > on “recommendation” language generally, and > https://github.com/quicwg/ops-drafts/pull/467 > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/github.com/quicwg/ops-drafts/pull/467__;!!BhdT!ja5YmdO4uaBZJglvL3utBGoizA3beR66DhMXcTXFI3U9srTnu6td0NOfpRKI_PKDB6jYUSWzM0NT$> > rephrasing recommendations not to switch on version into an analysis of the > tradeoffs (thanks Lucas for your help with these!). Please have a look and > let me know whether those resolve this discussion. > > Thanks, cheers, > > Brian > >
