IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Draft IESG Statement on Removal of an Internet-Draft from the IETF Web Site

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Wed, 05 September 2012 20:00 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.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 E036621F86B9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 13:00:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.166
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.166 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.433, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QazfTz4noAs3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 13:00:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39A3621F86AD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 13:00:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.115] (helo=JcK-HP8200.jck.com) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1T9LlZ-000LpC-PT; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 16:00:01 -0400
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 15:59:56 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: SM <sm@resistor.net>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Draft IESG Statement on Removal of an Internet-Draft from the IETF Web Site
Message-ID: <0901BE7939A76E7CA259D178@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20120905104856.0ad916a8@resistor.net>
References: <612BDD24-8E51-43D9-BFB6-25C90635CA5C@ietf.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20120905005713.08dde888@resistor.net> <CAKe6YvOxcuHh7R3MfmYnCRWymAqW-Tum6H9Hc_aAhERohevyEA@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20120905063923.0b328fe0@resistor.net> <504777F4.9000707@gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20120905104856.0ad916a8@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>, Subramanian Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 20:00:06 -0000

--On Wednesday, September 05, 2012 11:02 -0700 SM
<sm@resistor.net> wrote:

> At 09:04 05-09-2012, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> That's an interesting but not very informative statement.
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg71391.html

Of course, there is a case to be made that, if we had a more
sophisticated posting system that enforced the few rules we
already have, it would not have been accepted and posted in the
first place.  Individual drafts are supposed to be title
draft-OneOfTheAuthorNames-foo-bar-NN.  This one didn't meet that
rule.   From the standpoint of those rules/conventions about
naming at least, it is as if I posted something as
draft-moonesamy-foobar-00 or draft-carpenter-barfoo-00 in the
hope that would get extra attention.

That said, the author in this particular case could presumably
have posted draft-vesely-spam-reporting-using-imap-kleansed-00
and then persuaded the Secretariat that it replaced
draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap-kleansed-00, thereby
causing the latter to be removed from the _active_ I-D
repository and moved off to the historical I-D archive.

    john

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email