Re: [auth48] *[AD] Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9309 <draft-koster-rep-12> for your review

[Gary Illyes <[e-mail]>]

Sure, makes sense; we can do that. In that case I'll use the latest HTTP
RFC instead of 1945

On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 20:11, Murray S. Kucherawy <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Fair enough.  I wonder though if we should have some kind of link to what
> HTTP is anyway, perhaps attached to its first appearance in the prose after
> the introduction.  It really is a normative dependency here, even if it is
> ubiquitous.
>
> -MSK
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 11:02 AM Gary Illyes <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>> We could, if there was an RFC that says that clients must follow *at
>> least* 5 hops. Unfortunately all I can find is the opposite, follow *up to*
>> 5 hops (because more is likely a loop).
>>
>> On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 19:59, Murray S. Kucherawy <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The new "MUST NOT" is fine.  Rather than deleting it, should we replace
>>> the reference to RFC 1945 with a reference to one of the newer HTTP RFCs?
>>>
>>> -MSK, ART AD
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 10:39 AM Lynne Bartholomew <
>>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Gary, Lizzi, Martijn, and *AD (Murray),
>>>>
>>>> * Murray, please let us know if you approve (1) the removal of
>>>> Normative Ref. RFC 1945 and (2) a new sentence containing "MUST NOT" in
>>>> Section 2.2.4.
>>>>
>>>> Gary, thank you very much for the updated XML files!
>>>>
>>>> Martijn, your contact information in the Authors' Addresses section now
>>>> appears as follows.  Please confirm that this is as desired:
>>>>
>>>>    Martijn Koster (editor)
>>>>    Suton Lane
>>>>    Wymondham, Norfolk
>>>>    NR18 9JG
>>>>    United Kingdom
>>>>    Email: [e-mail]
>>>>
>>>> The latest files are posted here:
>>>>
>>>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309.txt
>>>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309.pdf
>>>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309.html
>>>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309.xml
>>>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309-diff.html
>>>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309-rfcdiff.html
>>>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309-auth48diff.html
>>>>
>>>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309-xmldiff1.html
>>>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309-xmldiff2.html
>>>>
>>>> Gary, Lizzi, and Martijn, we have noted your approvals on the AUTH48
>>>> status page:
>>>>
>>>>    https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9309
>>>>
>>>> Thanks again!
>>>>
>>>> RFC Editor/lb
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > From: Gary Illyes <garyillyes=[e-mail]>
>>>> > Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9309 <draft-koster-rep-12> for your
>>>> review
>>>> > Date: August 29, 2022 at 2:41:50 AM PDT
>>>> > To: Martijn Koster <[e-mail]>, Henner Zeller <
>>>> [e-mail]>
>>>> > Cc: [e-mail], [e-mail], Ted Hardie <
>>>> [e-mail]>, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[e-mail]>,
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> >
>>>> > Thank you. Done on github (
>>>> https://github.com/google/robotstxt/blob/master/protocol-draft/rfc9309.xml#L18)
>>>> and attached to this email again.
>>>> >
>>>> > Henner, we need the last LGTM from you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > From: Martijn Koster <[e-mail]>
>>>> > Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9309 <draft-koster-rep-12> for your
>>>> review
>>>> > Date: August 29, 2022 at 2:01:13 AM PDT
>>>> > To: Gary Illyes <[e-mail]>
>>>> > Cc: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
>>>> Ted Hardie <[e-mail]>, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <
>>>> [e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi Gary,
>>>> >
>>>> > Please remove my organisation Stalworthy Computing, Ltd  from
>>>> >
>>>> https://github.com/google/robotstxt/blob/master/protocol-draft/rfc9309.xml#L18
>>>> >
>>>> > The rest LGTM
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks,
>>>> >
>>>> > — Martijn
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > From: Lizzi Sassman <lizzi=[e-mail]>
>>>> > Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9309 <draft-koster-rep-12> for your
>>>> review
>>>> > Date: August 26, 2022 at 12:58:13 PM PDT
>>>> > To: Gary Illyes <[e-mail]>
>>>> > Cc: [e-mail], Martijn Koster <
>>>> [e-mail]>, Henner Zeller <[e-mail]>, Ted
>>>> Hardie <[e-mail]>, [e-mail],
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> >
>>>> > The draft LGTM.
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks,
>>>> > Lizzi
>>>>
>>>> > On Aug 26, 2022, at 7:08 AM, Gary Illyes <garyillyes=
>>>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Thank you for your edits and review. Lizzi and I addressed the
>>>> comments received and attached the updated XML to this email (also at
>>>> https://github.com/google/robotstxt/blob/master/protocol-draft/rfc9309.xml
>>>> )
>>>> >
>>>> > The draft attached looks good to me and from my perspective approved
>>>> for publication.
>>>> >
>>>> > Martijn, Lizzi, Henner, please review this draft and provide feedback
>>>> (probably on GitHub) and/or approval for publication.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 8:24 AM <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>> > *****IMPORTANT*****
>>>> >
>>>> > Updated 2022/08/25
>>>> >
>>>> > RFC Author(s):
>>>> > --------------
>>>> >
>>>> > Instructions for Completing AUTH48
>>>> >
>>>> > Your document has now entered AUTH48.  Once it has been reviewed and
>>>> > approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC.
>>>> > If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies
>>>> > available as listed in the FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/).
>>>> >
>>>> > You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties
>>>> > (e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing
>>>> > your approval.
>>>> >
>>>> > Planning your review
>>>> > ---------------------
>>>> >
>>>> > Please review the following aspects of your document:
>>>> >
>>>> > *  RFC Editor questions
>>>> >
>>>> >    Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor
>>>> >    that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as
>>>> >    follows:
>>>> >
>>>> >    <!-- [rfced] ... -->
>>>> >
>>>> >    These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email.
>>>> >
>>>> > *  Changes submitted by coauthors
>>>> >
>>>> >    Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your
>>>> >    coauthors.  We assume that if you do not speak up that you
>>>> >    agree to changes submitted by your coauthors.
>>>> >
>>>> > *  Content
>>>> >
>>>> >    Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot
>>>> >    change once the RFC is published.  Please pay particular attention
>>>> to:
>>>> >    - IANA considerations updates (if applicable)
>>>> >    - contact information
>>>> >    - references
>>>> >
>>>> > *  Copyright notices and legends
>>>> >
>>>> >    Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in
>>>> >    RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions
>>>> >    (TLP – https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/).
>>>> >
>>>> > *  Semantic markup
>>>> >
>>>> >    Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements
>>>> of
>>>> >    content are correctly tagged.  For example, ensure that
>>>> <sourcecode>
>>>> >    and <artwork> are set correctly.  See details at
>>>> >    <https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>.
>>>> >
>>>> > *  Formatted output
>>>> >
>>>> >    Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the
>>>> >    formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is
>>>> >    reasonable.  Please note that the TXT will have formatting
>>>> >    limitations compared to the PDF and HTML.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Submitting changes
>>>> > ------------------
>>>> >
>>>> > To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as
>>>> all
>>>> > the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The
>>>> parties
>>>> > include:
>>>> >
>>>> >    *  your coauthors
>>>> >
>>>> >    *  [e-mail] (the RPC team)
>>>> >
>>>> >    *  other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g.,
>>>> >       IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the
>>>> >       responsible ADs, and the document shepherd).
>>>> >
>>>> >    *  [e-mail], which is a new archival mailing
>>>> list
>>>> >       to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active
>>>> discussion
>>>> >       list:
>>>> >
>>>> >      *  More info:
>>>> >
>>>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc
>>>> >
>>>> >      *  The archive itself:
>>>> >         https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/
>>>> >
>>>> >      *  Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt
>>>> out
>>>> >         of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive
>>>> matter).
>>>> >         If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that
>>>> you
>>>> >         have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded,
>>>> >         [e-mail] will be re-added to the CC list
>>>> and
>>>> >         its addition will be noted at the top of the message.
>>>> >
>>>> > You may submit your changes in one of two ways:
>>>> >
>>>> > An update to the provided XML file
>>>> >  — OR —
>>>> > An explicit list of changes in this format
>>>> >
>>>> > Section # (or indicate Global)
>>>> >
>>>> > OLD:
>>>> > old text
>>>> >
>>>> > NEW:
>>>> > new text
>>>> >
>>>> > You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an
>>>> explicit
>>>> > list of changes, as either form is sufficient.
>>>> >
>>>> > We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that
>>>> seem
>>>> > beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of
>>>> text,
>>>> > and technical changes.  Information about stream managers can be
>>>> found in
>>>> > the FAQ.  Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream
>>>> manager.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Approving for publication
>>>> > --------------------------
>>>> >
>>>> > To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email
>>>> stating
>>>> > that you approve this RFC for publication.  Please use ‘REPLY ALL’,
>>>> > as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Files
>>>> > -----
>>>> >
>>>> > The files are available here:
>>>> >    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309.xml
>>>> >    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309.html
>>>> >    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309.pdf
>>>> >    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309.txt
>>>> >
>>>> > Diff file of the text:
>>>> >    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309-diff.html
>>>> >    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309-rfcdiff.html (side by
>>>> side)
>>>> >
>>>> > Diff of the XML:
>>>> >    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309-xmldiff1.html
>>>> >
>>>> > The following files are provided to facilitate creation of your own
>>>> > diff files of the XML.
>>>> >
>>>> > Initial XMLv3 created using XMLv2 as input:
>>>> >    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309.original.v2v3.xml
>>>> >
>>>> > XMLv3 file that is a best effort to capture v3-related format updates
>>>> > only:
>>>> >    https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9309.form.xml
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Tracking progress
>>>> > -----------------
>>>> >
>>>> > The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
>>>> >    https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9309
>>>> >
>>>> > Please let us know if you have any questions.
>>>> >
>>>> > Thank you for your cooperation,
>>>> >
>>>> > RFC Editor
>>>> >
>>>> > --------------------------------------
>>>> > RFC9309 (draft-koster-rep-12)
>>>> >
>>>> > Title            : Robots Exclusion Protocol
>>>> > Author(s)        : M. Koster, Ed., G. Illyes, Ed., H. Zeller, Ed., L.
>>>> Sassman, Ed.
>>>> > WG Chair(s)      :
>>>> > Area Director(s) :
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > <rfc9309.xml>
>>>>
>>>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Gary
>>
> --
Thanks,
Gary