RSSAC001 wrt to 2870Bis

[Joe Abley]

Hi Marc,

This is great, many thanks.


Joe

On 13 Oct 2014, at 10:37, Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet at viagenie.ca> wrote:

> Terry,
> now that you have issued a one week LC, I think it is the time to tighten the relationship between the two documents (rssac01 and 2870bis). I'm providing here some suggested changes for this, feel free to wordsmit if needed.
> 
> Regards, Marc.
> 
> 
> 
> Le 2014-09-24 à 08:23, Terry Manderson <terry.manderson at icann.org> a écrit :
> <RSSAC001- Service Expectations of Root Servers-2014-10-09-TJM-mb.doc>
>> Hi Lars,
>> 
>> On 15/09/2014 5:42 pm, "Lars-Johan Liman" <liman at netnod.se> wrote:
>> 
>>> terry.manderson at icann.org:
>>>> Mark and Lars,
>>> 
>>> Hi, Terry!
>>> 
>>> ... and thanks for pushing this forward!
>>> 
>>>> As document leaders for RSSAC001, Joe and I are taking this opportunity
>>>> to
>>>> reach out regarding RSSAC001 noting the observed interdependencies
>>>> between
>>>> 2870bis and RSSAC001.
>>> 
>>>> We are working toward a timeline for delivering RSSAC001 to the RSSAC,
>>>> and
>>>> while we are still some 8 weeks of that due date review has been
>>>> performed
>>>> by the RSSAC Caucus. We are now soliciting feedback from both of you and
>>>> any other parties involved in the construction of 2870bis.
>>> 
>>>> We accept time (your) is precious, so Joe and I also offer review time
>>>> for
>>>> 2870bis and our thanks for reading through RSSAC001.
>>> 
>>> I'll let Marc respond, as he's "on top of" the schedule for 2870". If
>>> there's an opportunity to get them back in sync, I think we should take
>>> it.
>> 
>> Please let us know!!
>> 
>>> 
>>> Marc, what's the exact current status of 2870"? I seem to remember there
>>> was an IAB last call, and comments from Paul Hoffman, but that was
>>> before(?) we published the draft version of RSSAC001, no? What happened
>>> then?
>>> 
>>> Terry, the last things I see on the caucus list is the solicitation for
>>> outstanding issues (excellent!), and the ensuing thread. Has there been
>>> any changes to the text in RSSAC001 since then?
>> 
>> There hasn't been (from what I see) any substantive changes to the text.
>> Admittedly the document was well formed already and really just needs a
>> good editing.
>> 
>> Joe and I will come together very soon on that.
>> 
>> Please feel free to update the RSSAC with this info. (I am unable to make
>> the exec call today)
>> 
>> Cheers
>> Terry
>