Re: Last Call: <draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-12.txt> (Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs) to Best Current Practice

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 04 June 2016 21:03 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39DA812B00E for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 4 Jun 2016 14:03:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DFJ-J6hSmQjP for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 4 Jun 2016 14:03:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x234.google.com (mail-pf0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98CAC12B00A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 4 Jun 2016 14:03:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x234.google.com with SMTP id z187so569029pfz.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 14:03:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aN2TlElVJAG3wiWFAfjioDq/pS3+nz4nHkXff6t7dBw=; b=PzUW6zug9QzOycmSdFZvp7+6F6Sv+4LOYEANccsW4xPNSvCa5JaM0a4kH7XNWvKVWp dWwiA/1WMMs/kRDaTpWZJSnRVrbT2SUHu0OhKn/VSPoG9Annf+ODLSxY6n8CnXqDCYDq MizrTcXub0X3Wv42hzt0SH8uj2oVzkQMR/p4e86Q7U3B5WFKgx9umOAlriQVGiR1MiQT aQr9KciDaI1ALch1089vX+iQOXJh5pyPr9xyZBQooYSDLvdPCWyPfCQM5ATGjgBtlP+6 Qg2fVEv4TGoQrwB9NzsfMW5bN7jiC8FN0oDMgLDONb2GPz6Aq7B1WDIDnXIGrdkqsXdp D0yw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=aN2TlElVJAG3wiWFAfjioDq/pS3+nz4nHkXff6t7dBw=; b=KEsvYPAGE/DRdt4XqNy3xyfDVZKINubRUiV7f7AvpdESuGxN6pgacdVOLys3heOyFY BRFv9fdzGotGBTEh98Da2MBAlHh435pM2RdhynWGm/sVY143iG/RD1DbUosWW7i6WMJN AEpYVzgIVr/Sb8svYKJpficWkw6FX2z6qUwJH5mAh42Rmnetq4nmLa4hDl4VDmZy+GCY qfi1mZlLE180soZXVKc0uLQX8r7FyifG5TntWsFGMM4rwQ+nghajSjZHIC6zWLR2kYtk 92OqsiZaquoEfk+nraBHm/TabIM9bcFCKdvTk4xwyCaTlZiF5Foy92+sXPQQ4GAc+aEk mK5Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIAoGWBcn5k9XK+BHzjsqL0IIsYCLWDz8PzqzyTHKvOKvmkjSCBiKllCo4DO2+aQw==
X-Received: by 10.98.58.84 with SMTP id h81mr14745792pfa.93.1465074182075; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 14:03:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.22] ([118.148.72.115]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s8sm14750601pav.39.2016.06.04.14.02.58 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 04 Jun 2016 14:03:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-leiba-cotton-iana-5226bis-12.txt> (Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs) to Best Current Practice
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <20160419141640.31545.54742.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <575185A2.70908@cs.tcd.ie> <EDA3CD0D-BDCA-4AC6-AA67-318670080338@sobco.com> <CAC4RtVBngkPc-yQ8P0qyvwsG9L4qjDMDPZ5xwa4gR84=ov4iUg@mail.gmail.com> <CAF4+nEHzvVOq_1L2ukX-OcPGkVFgR2OOD5puLMBJGif3a=Hzaw@mail.gmail.com> <CAC4RtVC6sKnYQS3mOay8-rSLQ0+U5mYGVhBbSSD=0xNX6dt2ng@mail.gmail.com> <5751D5E8.6030803@cs.tcd.ie> <CALaySJ+3jorRopPKNHjy19fo1v1=dZEHarMJ1-gB89vNbkFxaw@mail.gmail.com> <5751ED8B.4020508@isi.edu> <9b7a1b04-f767-517a-bd84-28c030695dfc@gmail.com> <57521D24.40700@cs.tcd.ie> <CAC4RtVBMA42Ke_m6ked9GtUTdGSdg-Jjxp5ibiWBDdG+p2y-2w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <687ad7f1-cd0f-dd3c-02e4-f0da17e6da83@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2016 09:02:56 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVBMA42Ke_m6ked9GtUTdGSdg-Jjxp5ibiWBDdG+p2y-2w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/6b57phdDyhoQ0ISBetE5WTwDGrc>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2016 21:03:04 -0000

On 05/06/2016 06:42, Barry Leiba wrote:
> I just find it fascinating and disturbing that at least two respected
> IETF participants think it's perfectly fine to leave stale references
> around, especially when it's trivially easy to fix them -- in the vast
> majority of cases taking but one sentence in the IANA Considerations.
> I'm simply flabbergasted.  This isn't "useless hoops"; it's simple and
> sensible updates that rarely take any effort.

Yes. I find stackoverflow as useful as anyone, but the people who provide
correct answers there ultimately depend on RFCs and the IANA registry, so the
latter just needs to be consistent with the former.

   Brian

> 
> Barry
> 
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 8:13 PM, Stephen Farrell
> <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>; wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/06/16 00:35, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>> That's not realistic. If IANA refers to RFC822, and the programmer has a
>>> copy of RFC822 on her disk, that's what she will follow, because RFC text
>>> never changes and does not say "I am obsolete".
>>
>> I don't get how that applies.
>>
>> Do we think there's a programmer who will start from IANA and
>> not notice that there are references to 5322 and 2822? If
>> there is such a peculiarly myopic programmer, their code will
>> likely be crap anyway won't it?
>>
>> Or do we think there's a programmer who'll start from RFC822
>> and not think "hey, this thing's 43 years old - I wonder did
>> anything happen in the meantime?" ;-)
>>
>> And anyway the current facts are that folks will much more
>> likely depend on stack overflow, not IANA, so the entire question
>> of the best reference is pretty much close to moot.
>>
>> IMO the only reason any of this matters is when there's a subtle
>> difference between the RFCyyyy and RFCxxxx versions of the same
>> registered thing and where there's significantly improved text in
>> RFCxxxx. In which case... we don't have a problem - RFCxxxx has
>> solved it for us by definition.
>>
>> All that's to say that there is no need to, and only a downside
>> to, forcing document authors to jump through more useless hoops.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> S.
>>
>