IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: I-D Action: draft-roach-bis-documents-00.txt

"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Wed, 08 May 2019 14:52 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.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 51D1312010C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 May 2019 07:52:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, 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=joelhalpern.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 ADauZToxdhoz for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 May 2019 07:52:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CDC0120104 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 May 2019 07:52:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44zfZZ10QSzySJf; Wed, 8 May 2019 07:52:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1557327126; bh=r8PCCyjfc1USAKvmrCY8Bc7akH3oGnCguIuw2tOQpqs=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=BcPJz64tv9A3n1lyFMLl4daIso6Oznk+I7B1alWN2MDTLaalWwhk9CG9NvBBAB8P9 tDtvP/DsU3/PihpINGDoWVHN025508ObVIWnElzM7w26mJm8dIQ9QD+Hb90kciknE2 2wFDoyfOGM+fFvEeaxjXN4RDqYYs1mc6tealM7zE=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net
Received: from Joels-MacBook-Pro.local (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 44zfZY3W9XzySJV; Wed, 8 May 2019 07:52:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-roach-bis-documents-00.txt
To: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>, "adam@nostrum.com" <adam@nostrum.com>
References: <155727468140.24481.6999490968617833064@ietfa.amsl.com> <4565215f-c36c-7264-c30a-52d2f9547346@gmail.com> <9A1F1926-9295-4997-96CE-276225DD0C4C@ericsson.com>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <f22aa482-3f08-1181-b761-a2ae6fd5f823@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Wed, 08 May 2019 10:52:04 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9A1F1926-9295-4997-96CE-276225DD0C4C@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/M0aOs9DNMCmnxejqixC_F0VE3Yc>
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: Wed, 08 May 2019 14:52:07 -0000

I like the approach in this document and think it is a useful 
improvement in how we handle the revision problem.

Thinking about it, there is one issue that it does not address, that 
seems relevant, and that I am not sure how to handle.

What should be done about other documents that update the base document. 
  We have RFC A, updated by RFCs B and C.  We are now producing Abis. 
For the specific purpose of fixing a couple of narrow issues that really 
need to be addressed.
What should this narrow Abis say about B and C?

Yours,
Joel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email