[datatracker-rqmts] Fwd: Last Call: <draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-community-06.txt> (Requirements for Internet-Draft Tracking by the IETF Community in the Datatracker) to Informational RFC

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Tue, 15 March 2011 01:53 UTC

Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: datatracker-rqmts@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: datatracker-rqmts@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2234B3A6973 for <datatracker-rqmts@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:53:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.596
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.596 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.002, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_RED=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EPut+46733nZ for <datatracker-rqmts@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:53:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E9E33A68AB for <datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:53:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.105] (pool-173-57-91-217.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [173.57.91.217]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p2F1sQ9E072671 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:54:26 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-5--275681064
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:54:25 -0500
References: <28D21647-E997-4A55-868C-E7C070ADB82D@nostrum.com>
To: datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org
Message-Id: <CAB9EFB3-03C1-40E2-9E6C-8CF6352FC9BA@nostrum.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082)
Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: 173.57.91.217 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Subject: [datatracker-rqmts] Fwd: Last Call: <draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-community-06.txt> (Requirements for Internet-Draft Tracking by the IETF Community in the Datatracker) to Informational RFC
X-BeenThere: datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <datatracker-rqmts.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/datatracker-rqmts>, <mailto:datatracker-rqmts-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/datatracker-rqmts>
List-Post: <mailto:datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:datatracker-rqmts-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/datatracker-rqmts>, <mailto:datatracker-rqmts-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 01:53:07 -0000

Resending to correct a mailing list name typo.

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>;
> Date: March 14, 2011 4:46:03 PM CDT
> To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>;
> Cc: ietf@ietf.org, datatracker-reqmts@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-community-06.txt> (Requirements for Internet-Draft Tracking by the IETF Community in the Datatracker) to Informational RFC
> 
> One additional thought -
> 
> How much would the list of attributes in 2.1.6 need to be expanded to make one of these user-defined lists
> enough to satisfy the initial "Reporting Requirements" in section 4.3 of draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-iana-rfced-extns-00?
> Should we add the ability to match against the values (or absence of value) of a state for the various state machines tracked by the tracker?
> 
> RjS
> 
> On Mar 14, 2011, at 4:26 PM, Robert Sparks wrote:
> 
>> Paul -
>> 
>> 1) If we publish this as an RFC, note that imgur.com will only keep an image if it's viewed at least once every three months.
>> 
>> 2) In the list of things constituting an "update to an RFC", could you call out marking an RFC as Historic, and changing the
>> maturity level of an RFC in place (such as was done for 5652)
>> 
>> 3) 2.1.2 talks of the ease of use to create a datatracker account. I think we have that already through the tools system.
>> Are you thinking this will require the creation of a different system?
>> 
>> RjS
>> 
>> On Mar 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, The IESG wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> The IESG has received a request from the General Area Open Meeting WG
>>> (genarea) to consider the following document:
>>> - 'Requirements for Internet-Draft Tracking by the IETF Community in the
>>> Datatracker'
>>> <draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-community-06.txt> as an Informational
>>> RFC
>>> 
>>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
>>> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
>>> ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2011-03-18. Exceptionally, comments may be
>>> sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
>>> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>>> 
>>> The file can be obtained via
>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-community/
>>> 
>>> IESG discussion can be tracked via
>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-community/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IETF-Announce mailing list
>>> IETF-Announce@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>> 
>