Re: [Ext] Re: [rfc-i] Evolving document sources over a long time (Re: Comments on draft-roach-bis-documents-00)

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Thu, 23 May 2019 09:46 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
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 4633E120179 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 May 2019 02:46:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-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 (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
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 JdhPZb5gzHXh for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 May 2019 02:46:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (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 59292120075 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 May 2019 02:46:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1558604772; bh=g2oz5wGx+i8LF4GEzJnmL9p6GTsztvzlJ4KvggD2FZg=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=fADcMiDVwpx3DHbJf/GL6DjPzvUmU0/2Wja0bqodzhr9MmrYm0EkUPYRYMh6BlwzW G8wMyHNpzYM/KqovfbT16J+7/rMg2vukkNXjQyxkdVgAZU9xQXIwzUNMaE9GEd4gvK 6HAIYXg4f7GwrFGSx81x4fwl0yonzGr9uog3oHkM=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [192.168.1.34] ([217.91.35.233]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LwrS8-1gan881wnw-016OFW; Thu, 23 May 2019 11:46:12 +0200
Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [rfc-i] Evolving document sources over a long time (Re: Comments on draft-roach-bis-documents-00)
To: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>, tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>, David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>, Michelle Cotton <michelle.cotton@iana.org>
References: <CADaq8jdRMUZAN3rRXoActXqvGpkgx_-kW67uwzGLtVPoh7LfAQ@mail.gmail.com> <6E787E2A-18F2-4EFE-BFBA-61B1B4300930@tzi.org> <CADaq8jc1KJwC=Ypoo9a+-=Me=GP5tgX=2kcfUd56o53Mcu05kw@mail.gmail.com> <9179590B-C513-44DC-906C-16534DA8EC51@tzi.org> <1852d84b-48cc-0129-3564-6ec9b92c4315@gmx.de> <8A7B4E94-DBCD-4EE3-8FEA-EA642F1071BF@tzi.org> <CADaq8jeLwELxGM_zWG_OhiZ3nkm_F_a7A71B7aEv+xDdBmhYqg@mail.gmail.com> <CADaq8jciU-yC1KDmXfYc7rqc9vtS0c3D_fWeFN=GEw4bxchMkA@mail.gmail.com> <74f72a19-a400-1cf2-a2a0-5abbf3646b43@nostrum.com> <866F6E4F-C640-46A6-AADF-EC4C81F44B7D@iana.org> <CADaq8jcARXdm=x5xcCurPnRfORApcnHQL2-n-ccfSSQT3V1Twg@mail.gmail.com> <CAA=duU1+Re=EiAiPkLCm3MHrHthwy4OUhzx0qvKxam2GVnd=fA@mail.gmail.com> <00df01d5113d$49183c60$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <CAA=duU1PyCRgnm3ip8GkTzEuLRC3hquvJRv_K511Xd45DCEd7A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <d3a0b3bd-ba90-1655-a0cf-ad2af3cc6202@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 11:46:10 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAA=duU1PyCRgnm3ip8GkTzEuLRC3hquvJRv_K511Xd45DCEd7A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:3HNje0eO0hEe2N+ObnHGt+rexi3SIdlc8R9wcm5OMAHb/ssXBs3 TjDdYq42z0ihieiSVfX3ZmJM7ifReYau1KHl8EjC/TLMpiq2lsAFb4B5bSSP2EO0EqMIWk7 dqgG6l/OW4QMQdE8MOD+XduuWfXJwiGQKAlBUadZbWEJoTcQvxxKFm5dIHseR5507veWGps n03X3TTA10T9K0CcnBBzQ==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:vYxMJgzcx5g=:MOms/kmbwf93CS0SFPQo67 y607ibvU1nmexHIK/4kTkkzj2qbEn3hSPwt4qz0ZQtX0NXVz45mMa1nZxI5FbpP4Lv6+WhNH1 xViIlkcrQCOP0rHgVfbC+tMoN9U2iBM9/MBqfE/KYfoLMzErCXOHCKatXiPVn6i0YXMaT2dEr KOcQ1ZhZNuhMw50GheTpNshMMoVWhIcOyqq0OOsGsiw+RhSNTLebI3BH4vok5pr7Coz50xccA ZCz2kIhA1nAjFTb0EuN8CQo5R1Uofn9RNx9QswpeHOeEppmuCqafZLbc8sWd+8QjhXmzYfj2C ORNg/aYgyP2Ku7ZkJKvtyCfBziSFP4QHZ+2O7QOnEaGIzAIlcZ7L463yPVYchhcx8lwlthiTu kCsFnmaDNZImxsN6y38RcAXb8+s1B85Cdbl28AmDKP+hr+wRkZYqARQNh2cMiWFmKf4SvX9E6 rr+KB7aZtptB47xTumbFgERKtGUYmVxmUsSbDLa+qoTvSBcmtJT8CKxXi4/6ckXIhMcAaHRgm JN1Vu514xpULtWUVIwVWopYA2FjFfTHGdgrhdlZUV1he+oMV96/rt7h7k39NZ6BnWa5urhXaB qtvC/y7VxsXGB4OpXsi/xqS6t9vlI86eJUm1v2t+Dr/fzYLalzqMNT9v81GQJh/5y2qvP988U HNY5gBnTGy3sz/BfcIZNtByGgL0Dlk72+XBnh19nrPtTr1xu/xBGhqCJCkq+iDsCgua22ZvUT NrWHXV0dDQuc6rfp/THY+43pDbK0MfU58CfYgb8C+GekYQfxUpFkEQSYc/GT/tleoKdT5+BGr HX6wLSnyP6IUB8lyLewLwGHxGkpcJN2vyR4esSn3i7e/IJSrXl1EFBf7hfk04Fh6NzDIBkY/s EZSWg6TR46hPAReys815GV8MSMryau8dixgtniHODy/eZN67bCyiWeFq/O34IkvD0MVb/cHOc iARnmfjdt4cRh4qd7dyv047SGOPtqpqsTvp8EWix+d7fXh5d8CIsA
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/6dKHQXgQOjDUEGhI-qMQda3lCtk>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 23 May 2019 09:46:28 -0000

On 23.05.2019 11:30, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
> Tom,
>
> I think you might have misunderstood my suggestion. To make it more
> concrete, let's say that we're creating RFC 1234bis to replace RFC 1234.
>
> Then RFC 1234bis's IANA considerations section would have two subsections:
>
> - What IANA Now Needs to Do (these are new actions resulting from the
> bis document)
>
> - What IANA Already Did in RFC 1234 (what IANA originally did, the
> original text from RFC 1234)
>
> That way you don't have to look in two places (RFC 1234bis and RFC 1234)
> to see everything that IANA did, both historically and now.

Understood - but why is that actually important enough to drag the old
information in? Wouldn't be linking to it be sufficient? Also, doesn't
it give the potentially incorrect impression that this is a complete
view of all IANA actions related to the protocol?

Best regards, Julian