Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.txt> (Publishing the "Tao of the IETF" as a Web Page) to Informational RFC

Tony Hansen <tony@att.com> Fri, 06 July 2012 04:29 UTC

Return-Path: <tony@att.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 09A2F11E809A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Jul 2012 21:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, 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 Gx5RwmDszWuj for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Jul 2012 21:29:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nbfkord-smmo05.seg.att.com (nbfkord-smmo05.seg.att.com [209.65.160.92]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1049511E808D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Jul 2012 21:29:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unknown [144.160.20.145] (EHLO mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) by nbfkord-smmo05.seg.att.com(mxl_mta-6.11.0-10) over TLS secured channel with ESMTP id c9966ff4.0.1209519.00-450.3325220.nbfkord-smmo05.seg.att.com (envelope-from <tony@att.com>); Fri, 06 Jul 2012 04:29:17 +0000 (UTC)
X-MXL-Hash: 4ff6699d295e890d-59e3acf5840743a0c537832b88ae2547fb41b4a8
Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q664TGsi015105 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 00:29:16 -0400
Received: from sflint01.pst.cso.att.com (sflint01.pst.cso.att.com [144.154.234.228]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q664TBse015102 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 00:29:12 -0400
Received: from alpd052.aldc.att.com (alpd052.aldc.att.com [130.8.42.31]) by sflint01.pst.cso.att.com (RSA Interceptor) for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 00:28:59 -0400
Received: from aldc.att.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alpd052.aldc.att.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q664Sxqn005088 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 00:28:59 -0400
Received: from mailgw1.maillennium.att.com (dns.maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by alpd052.aldc.att.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q664SrsZ005018 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 00:28:54 -0400
Received: from [135.70.75.23] (vpn-135-70-75-23.vpn.swst.att.com[135.70.75.23]) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with ESMTP id <20120706042442gw10060lthe> (Authid: tony); Fri, 6 Jul 2012 04:24:43 +0000
X-Originating-IP: [135.70.75.23]
Message-ID: <4FF66982.70308@att.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 00:28:50 -0400
From: Tony Hansen <tony@att.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-hoffman-tao-as-web-page-02.txt> (Publishing the "Tao of the IETF" as a Web Page) to Informational RFC
References: <20120615202915.11032.53296.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <6F9AF4A4C9466A87A81F1823@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <F404FCF4-3E55-4F5B-A17C-B6D85C84824C@vpnc.org> <4FF60B17.1060600@att.com> <CAFCD98A-246D-482C-B8CD-6875D49ED94F@vpnc.org> <4FF659F0.1020104@att.com> <9DF09405CDDF0E625FA03977@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <9DF09405CDDF0E625FA03977@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-RSA-Inspected: yes
X-RSA-Classifications: public
X-Spam: [F=0.2000000000; CM=0.500; S=0.200(2010122901)]
X-MAIL-FROM: <tony@att.com>
X-SOURCE-IP: [144.160.20.145]
X-AnalysisOut: [v=1.0 c=1 a=gpx8--TvblYA:10 a=cgbV5Ep4loIA:10 a=djGLZF5izP]
X-AnalysisOut: [IA:10 a=ofMgfj31e3cA:10 a=BLceEmwcHowA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:1]
X-AnalysisOut: [0 a=ZRNLZ4dFUbCvG8UMqPvVAA==:17 a=zQP7CpKOAAAA:8 a=48vgC7m]
X-AnalysisOut: [UAAAA:8 a=gS9mA5k4ELG0p3x88G0A:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=5IhAZ]
X-AnalysisOut: [et7BUoA:10 a=Hz7IrDYlS0cA:10]
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: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 04:29:03 -0000

Authoritative, no. But definitely referenced by many, many people and 
IMO worthy of a certain amount of care.

     Tony Hansen

On 7/5/2012 11:57 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
> --On Thursday, July 05, 2012 23:22 -0400 Tony Hansen
> <tony@att.com> wrote:
>
>> I think my point was missed. Section 2 says:
>>
>> All published versions will be archived using URLs of the form
>> <http://www.ietf.org/tao-YYYYMMDD.html>.
>>
>> My question is: Where is there a list of all of the tao
>> version files? How would one be able to find out the name of
>> the previous version so they could do a diff and see what has
>> changed? How can I see a history of the files?
>> ...
> Tony,
>
> Mostly out of curiosity, why do you think it is important.   If
> the Tao were a reference document that was authoritative on IETF
> procedures or the like, it would be a different matter: I can
> think of many reasons why it might be important to establish
> exactly what the rules and procedures were at any given time.
> But, given that it is a non-authoritative tutorial summary
> description of how we do things, I have a certain amount of
> trouble understanding why going to extra effort to maintain a
> long-term back trace is actually important.
>
> What am I missing?
>
>      john
>