IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Visibility of current RFC Maturity Levels (and how they got there (was: Re: Last Call: Moving RFC 4405, RFC 4406, RFC 4407 (Sender-ID) to Historic)

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Tue, 15 May 2018 16:41 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@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 EEDC112DA6D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 May 2018 09:41:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, 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 9_Dp0CsKDZyy for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 May 2018 09:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x230.google.com (mail-it0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::230]) (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 84C3012D950 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 May 2018 09:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x230.google.com with SMTP id 70-v6so3287842ity.2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 May 2018 09:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=6DJlRTYKxrQpSPsRQrB9wVigpRbvs28KgkfhASp4hKU=; b=XUVvCPljnuI2NxSuvagdJQfmk95M98yHN159JxJJ+bZDBKNqY5gMF5yHJN3CEwf4ue JHPu5OSNhLiltz0FmjAms7IlvA4cwXTT8aTbxZSmsrW60aE4FAWpxEoYmcqOYS3URbib RxBnQdMQ3/i6omPbVap1JrwFRT+f1jGDAqIYKJZziR3Ti+ss8N3i7yy3O2w1+v8G8UNS iWCfkjqSyujFex/6IegBu8vLdgOBKIVI54Q4vOuxIEadoGega19nepnSbDdTv+39MuS4 abc5d8o6fHNjM+129UtD2TUoOE1DPk86xXL9zdp2uVJGBlmeucE7fD83nNl+jWc3M2DA TcBw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6DJlRTYKxrQpSPsRQrB9wVigpRbvs28KgkfhASp4hKU=; b=PVB2fh9WH/83Gnv/LhhktFnSQ/e9ZwMYyUCkJVTbyasgZEmJ7l8i5+o+NRfKoLwQCn /vIzfIF1t3oHA+w4VN7BJDOkYgBnatYfFAS+VclI2Dnbp4QlxWSKfyirn9z2WhWJuoTj +6WcZsgbWRFsfycl0nGIB7s7xdrFSV9MfED2i4i0Rs3KLxBsM0RV3tbTiyuskIgE855G d1SbUn1rFw4O5YxX+XoXfxQLNft586QwkA7CGZ89XwWAjJ4pnY/mjAlmqBY1jV3s/mPN bf/iQ0dUClm5PSQP18Cnp4ZChc2/1KZ6IBGUCyqC5YI/bGlDMHOKZbMQGF+4KkKTdAII Z57w==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwcmsvJzHJAczZcTcXda+0oLt4j1O1xOB95MzAgtEf5vUX1SP9FY RcIZqU0oSEdJcyBZJAcSriGYrnX4EEFeTKdSXNjz8g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZqomoEnIw+tEn1o8FgVR9wbTW1dAl9o3omijFfvb69sc3EkeH3A68TgHkAaPeUHhxixveTfiPcRiKw+nyNPRkE=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:b447:: with SMTP id d68-v6mr15900076iof.163.1526402478752; Tue, 15 May 2018 09:41:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com
Received: by 10.192.142.169 with HTTP; Tue, 15 May 2018 09:41:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <00fa01d3ec69$acb2da40$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
References: <CAKKJt-fcvUhQdDykv8mzS_a+AgAQO0jMBfK+zVk++FD=1+7w5w@mail.gmail.com> <a71ae235-57ca-1350-b4d7-36c78986cb5b@gmail.com> <20180515160936.GD2249@kduck.kaduk.org> <CALaySJK30CH4M-Kq=3swja9qUY7oRzRcKgnYaLiT66iMtVwXLw@mail.gmail.com> <00fa01d3ec69$acb2da40$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 17:41:18 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: NuNT8ik3CTfl9S0hYFqvDnBUMMU
Message-ID: <CALaySJKiAB0sDe8p0bQ9jH-oJ2ecwF5ghqqvohceLpHTTuaL_A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Visibility of current RFC Maturity Levels (and how they got there (was: Re: Last Call: Moving RFC 4405, RFC 4406, RFC 4407 (Sender-ID) to Historic)
To: "tom p." <daedulus@btconnect.com>
Cc: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>, John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/7Ldb4rP9C2vSPZRGL9AnVF0Glh8>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 15 May 2018 16:41:21 -0000

Hi, Tom.

>> Well, if people are really going to the .txt files on rfc-editor.org,
>> then nothing we do in the process of changing an RFC's status will
>> help them, and it doesn't matter whether we use "obsoletes" or not.
>
> I do indeed go to the underlying .txt files, every week - rfc-index.txt!
> It is so much easier to search, to navigate than HTML.  And it tells me
> the Status.

I was referring to using the .txt files for the RFCs; yes, the index
contains the status.  But if you go directly to, say, rfc3540.txt, it
won't tell you that it's Historic.

b

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email