Re: Status of this memo
Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> Wed, 28 April 2021 09:54 UTC
Return-Path: <simon@josefsson.org>
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 79D033A215E for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 02:54:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=josefsson.org header.b=Zt042axQ; dkim=pass (2736-bit key) header.d=josefsson.org header.b=ru+cGa1G
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 D7dLUtEF091V for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 02:54:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uggla.sjd.se (uggla.sjd.se [IPv6:2001:9b1:8633::107]) (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 218A03A22C8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 02:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=josefsson.org; s=ed2101; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To :Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding :Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=tANYXc7o3XXvclzcHy8dies9vVgs3/FGULtalPXxiPo=; t=1619603651; x=1620813251; b=Zt042axQ6DvV/2/9aIfWmHI/EA/aFQzDXqOSHktMTqfu0KuXPnv6yMDmz3/+Z1++h4kmmuEJ8P p+160F8KoFBg==;
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=josefsson.org; s=rsa2101; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID: In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=tANYXc7o3XXvclzcHy8dies9vVgs3/FGULtalPXxiPo=; t=1619603651; x=1620813251; b=ru+cGa1GA84gRz84hiiV89xrnXT+HVLCx7EDPpsyAxCjUVRvQqEHYugZx6XMepSFoSv4njS/sM Ky7fjNElQRZ5VaY6TRkyzmSlDi/jMxenb07chRWBLkE4VKGUQ10hUIbKPyoAgaU7Pmx7LAMCf2LQu NEYUJn4QDhE7aTdpdHoSqIrLchPd/ZHkCqDhHkh+KCrFwRyRA2YePeHoLoAAS4R0/MU50wEMOKCCG zoHy2hCp6/bb3gyoynwt43HW4hsEwop/r2YZrB4Bijm6ASdzOalXLHu2dJE7Qklm+ssv2k/bn2xn5 KbhXTVmDTr9fPayOv9iaYFNaIhemtAY9dFv8DOFqCd4LmVTHh8NAEK4jMbiccekXPfnNqdOxrHUkA q6PnBXwzZkuo4J9hGGRPq9gciToEtagW60IwYHEjLAQ4umMHkMr4amYUmAqmjPdlUkDRi7L+TB ;
Received: from [2001:9b1:41ac:ff00:4cc8:b952:20c:6dba] (port=46276 helo=latte) by uggla.sjd.se with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <simon@josefsson.org>) id 1lbgtR-00018Y-36; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 09:54:05 +0000
From: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Status of this memo
References: <376f83f0-89a3-cd0e-1792-c8434bd8a5d2@gmail.com>
OpenPGP: id=B1D2BD1375BECB784CF4F8C4D73CF638C53C06BE; url=https://josefsson.org/key-20190320.txt
X-Hashcash: 1:22:210428:ietf@ietf.org::J3/rKEHnTcV0IP+V:At4i
X-Hashcash: 1:22:210428:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com::FrhsGwe6biRU6qo+:OFC4
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 11:54:04 +0200
In-Reply-To: <376f83f0-89a3-cd0e-1792-c8434bd8a5d2@gmail.com> (Brian E. Carpenter's message of "Tue, 27 Apr 2021 14:24:54 +1200")
Message-ID: <87czue20qr.fsf@latte.josefsson.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/dnnTGb29Nzq-OOV6bg6okoCLvMw>
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, 28 Apr 2021 09:54:47 -0000
Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> writes: > I don't what made this click in my brain now rather than 20 years ago, > but think about this extract from our I-D boilerplate**: > > "Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering > Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working > documents as Internet-Drafts." > > That's actually internally inconsistent and if the first sentence is > quoted without the second, it is actively misleading when (say) an > IRTF draft is concerned. > > Shouldn't those two sentences be combined into a more accurate single sentence?: > > Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task > Force (IETF) or of other associated groups or individuals. > > **The exact wording of the boilerplate has changed since 20 years ago, but the problem has always existed. Sometimes the solution to a problem isn't to add or modify something, it is to take away something. I suggest to drop this paragraph instead. As far as I can tell, the I-D boilerplate is something like the text below. If BCP78/BCP79, including their normative references, do not contain sufficient information to explain this, I believe it is better to solve whatever the problem is there. Further, the third paragraph about expiration is covered already by the normative reference to RFC 2026 section 2.2. Repeating things in different words can clarify, but it can also make things harder to understand when subtle differences creep in, as it appears to have done here. Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." This Internet-Draft will expire on 16 September 2021. /simon
- Status of this memo Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Status of this memo Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Status of this memo Lars Eggert
- Re: Status of this memo Vittorio Bertola
- Re: Status of this memo Lars Eggert
- Re: Status of this memo Donald Eastlake
- Re: Status of this memo Carsten Bormann
- Re: Status of this memo Andrew G. Malis
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Carsten Bormann
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Lars Eggert
- Re: Status of this memo Lloyd W
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Lars Eggert
- Re: Status of this memo Scott Brim
- Re: Status of this memo Vittorio Bertola
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Scott Bradner
- Re: Status of this memo Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- Re: Status of this memo Salz, Rich
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Andrew G. Malis
- Re: Status of this memo Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Martin Vigoureux
- Re: Status of this memo Carsten Bormann
- Re: Status of this memo Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Bob Hinden
- Re: Status of this memo Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Status of this memo Andrew G. Malis
- Re: Status of this memo Donald Eastlake
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Donald Eastlake
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Donald Eastlake
- Re: Status of this memo Donald Eastlake
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- RE: Status of this memo Michael McBride
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Carsten Bormann
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Donald Eastlake
- Re: Status of this memo Donald Eastlake
- Re: Status of this memo Donald Eastlake
- Re: Status of this memo John C Klensin
- Re: Status of this memo Martin Vigoureux
- Re: Status of this memo Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Status of this memo John C Klensin
- Re: Status of this memo Michael StJohns
- Re: Status of this memo Martin Vigoureux
- Re: Status of this memo Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: Status of this memo Randy Presuhn
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Status of this memo Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: Status of this memo Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Status of this memo John C Klensin
- Re: Status of this memo ned+ietf
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Status of this memo [NOTE WELL] Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo [WG consensus] Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Status of this memo [name remixing] Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Status of this memo Scott Bradner
- Re: Status of this memo Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Status of this memo [name remixing] Christian Huitema
- Re: Status of this memo Michael StJohns
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo ned+ietf
- Re: Status of this memo Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Status of this memo [NOTE WELL] Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Status of this memo [WG consensus] Theodore Ts'o
- Re: Status of this memo Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: Status of this memo John C Klensin
- Re: Status of this memo Lloyd W
- Re: Status of this memo John C Klensin
- Re: Status of this memo Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: Status of this memo Simon Josefsson
- Re: Status of this memo Lloyd W
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Keith Moore
- Re: Status of this memo Salz, Rich
- RE: Status of this memo Gorman, Pierce
- Re: Status of this memo Nick Hilliard
- Re: Status of this memo tom petch
- Re: Status of this memo Warren Kumari
- Re: Status of this memo Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Status of this memo S Moonesamy