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

[tom petch <[e-mail]>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Julian Reschke" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 12:10 PM

On 23.05.2019 13:05, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
> Julian,
>
> My understanding of the goal in draft-roach-bis-documents is to make
the
> bis RFC as close to the original as possible, including formatting
> (modulo changes resulting from tooling changes), so that you don't
need
> linking or to look in multiple places.

Yes. But...

> This would include a complete view of all IANA actions related to the
> protocol in one place. draft-roach wants to completely replace the
> original RFC with the bis, not just update it

I still don't get why past IANA actions are of any relevance for an
updated specification.

<tp>

me too, or me neither.

A statement that the registry was first set up in RFCxxxx is fine, plus
a change log if appropriate, but no more than that of the history.

The thornier question is of entries that have been added to a registry
since the initial setup. Most ADs do not regard adding an entry as being
an update to the original RFC so I would expect the bis to list the
registry entries that appear in the bis document referencing the
sections defining them and noting that this new bis is now the
definition of them and that the initial definition was in RFCxxxx.  We
need to end up with an RFCbis that is unequivocal about where the
authoritative text for the registry now is and I want that to be the bis
and to say so.

Assuming that the group and registry names are stable, and that the
intervening RFC that added entries to the registry have used the right
terminology then the fact that the definition of the registry is now in
RFCbis which has appeared years after the intervening RFC would not be a
problem.

Tom Petch

And yes, I understand that this is about replacing (obsoleting) a
document, not simply updating it. There may be cases where it's as
simple as that (RFC X replaced by RFC Xbis), but in my experience, there
are frequently other RFCs published in between that indeed updated the
original RFC and had their own IANA actions - so just having those from
X and Xbis does not give a complete picture.

Best regards, Julian