Re: Comments for <I-D of Publishing the "Tao of the IETF" as a Web Page>

SM <sm@resistor.net> Wed, 20 June 2012 15:45 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
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 1589A21F86B6 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:45:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.555
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.555 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.044, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wCgjGxbTF1RU for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:45:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8851221F86B4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:45:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q5KFj8iw004001; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:45:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1340207112; i=@resistor.net; bh=03pTrfOU3+4wIWeMonjBVmAlMf5svVQtmnSjE2GjmBU=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=peIG8obTbCwKRcN6iAnndRF8y2Yl0n0jajh9mfChhoRXHL+mOnT9UncfDXEMlJUzQ wqdgWIDPCI95wsycxCUAWtvXNinUeZay5FRjl8I8DrEQmfzKAHbddGybX/TnN/bUwd 8upRvYy81MwRQ03MFaUUkQhMH+scUK3vLx5mRCno=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1340207112; i=@resistor.net; bh=03pTrfOU3+4wIWeMonjBVmAlMf5svVQtmnSjE2GjmBU=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=PNquEG8weiSFmojekO18/sdOzL2WJtLzCuCs9+z3bKfErg0XSR4cJns/Xg+Rs8inJ FNDnadQEcHlEc3lpAKMMMpkyXwkUOXQgGaaWkHo6RSIf9IWr12vDPBOMD0qeMDGz3A as1URn8JqspbyXTnElb6xHtTTnIt9lVL4TbUSdoM=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20120620072437.0ad66a00@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:39:56 -0700
To: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
Subject: Re: Comments for <I-D of Publishing the "Tao of the IETF" as a Web Page>
In-Reply-To: <CADnDZ89fxJo_YbVMrVr+-Q_-nF72W9iG9vZapZNV+1O0gckpow@mail.g mail.com>
References: <CADnDZ89XGzmqRTL61rc9MSYRJCjs3BgwSDcM=J+_sKvoR1muEw@mail.gmail.com> <CADnDZ88jqzUpFwkyr9rtGQsoq3fNea_j-g2wpfz2081VrUakZg@mail.gmail.com> <CADnDZ89fxJo_YbVMrVr+-Q_-nF72W9iG9vZapZNV+1O0gckpow@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
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, 20 Jun 2012 15:45:20 -0000

Hi Abdussalam,
At 03:51 20-06-2012, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>  I refere to the IETF process of: preparing the I-D by WG,
>Community-accepting, Submitting, and IESG-approval. The new
>Tao-update-process of the draft is not including the community. The
>IETF process in draft is as : individual preparing, individual submit
>to Editor, Editor decides and accepts, Editor submitting, and
>IESG-approval.
>
>The above are two different IETF submission streams, which may be
>consistent if we include *the community* in accepting submission to
>IESG.

RFC 4844 discusses about RFC Series and the streams used by the 
various communities to publish a RFC.  One of those streams is for 
IETF Documents.  In the I-D being discussed, the document will be 
published on a web page.  The IESG will choose Paul Hoffman as the 
editor.  I gather that those details are not a problem.

draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02 mentions that the changes will be 
discussed on an open, Tao-specific mailing list.  The second 
paragraph of Section 2 and the third paragraph are not so clear about 
changes, i.e. the editor accepts proposed changes and the IESG 
accepts proposed changes.  Are you suggesting that the changes should 
be discussed in a Working Group or something else?

BTW, RFC 4677 should be moved to Historic instead of Obsolete.

Regards,
-sm