[datatracker-rqmts] What are WG drafts?

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Tue, 02 November 2010 17:14 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
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 E44A828C126 for <datatracker-rqmts@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 10:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.447
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.111, BAYES_05=-1.11, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, 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 PvxUwvie5Pe5 for <datatracker-rqmts@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 10:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A2583A6885 for <datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 10:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.20.30.150] (75-101-30-90.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [75.101.30.90]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oA2HEP4t085722 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 2 Nov 2010 10:14:26 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p0624089dc8f5f6f7256e@[10.20.30.150]>
In-Reply-To: <E4EE6733-D741-4F31-9B4F-40B0212B3DC8@cisco.com>
References: <p06240800c8ecfbb84168@[10.20.30.249]> <p0624088ac8f4ef10b46d@[10.20.30.249]> <E4EE6733-D741-4F31-9B4F-40B0212B3DC8@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 10:14:24 -0700
To: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org
Subject: [datatracker-rqmts] What are WG drafts?
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, 02 Nov 2010 17:14:24 -0000

At 9:15 AM -0700 11/2/10, Fred Baker wrote:
>One of the slides wonders what the rule is for identifying drafts associated with a working group. As I'm sure you know, there has been a convention for a long time in naming: draft-ietf-<wg>-*-nn.txt is a working group draft, and draft-<author>-<wg>-*-nn.txt is an individual submission to a working group. draft monikers that mention no working group are general submissions going nowhere in particular. I'm pretty sure that Henrik's existing tool looks for "draft-ietf-<wg>" and "anything containing <wg>" for the two areas.
>
>I like the convention; I find it useful. I do go a little crazy with the set of people that don't choose to use it, though; I get people posting drafts and then wanting to discuss them for several meetings in my WG but not follow the convention, which means that I have to manually track things. Since a "convention" is not a "rule" (eg, I don't care to be a hard-ass about it), I put in the extra work, but there is a part of me that would like the tool to be able to remember for me in some sense. "documents that follow the convention plus those I add".

Henrik: I believe that some actual WG drafts do not follow the draft-ietf-wgname rule. Is that true? If so, how does the Datatracker know to show them in the WG charter page? Is that done by hand?

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium