RE: [newtrk] Question about Obsoleted vs. Historic

john.loughney@nokia.com Tue, 12 July 2005 05:01 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DsCtp-0000hR-4q; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 01:01:41 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DsCti-0000h7-G3 for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 01:01:38 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26332 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 01:01:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: john.loughney@nokia.com
Received: from mgw-ext04.nokia.com ([131.228.20.96]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DsDLq-0002VG-53 for ietf@ietf.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 01:30:39 -0400
Received: from esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh105.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.211]) by mgw-ext04.nokia.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j6C4uALm017526; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 07:56:10 +0300
Received: from esebh101.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.177]) by esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 08:01:17 +0300
Received: from esebe100.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.118]) by esebh101.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 08:01:17 +0300
x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 08:01:16 +0300
Message-ID: <1AA39B75171A7144A73216AED1D7478D6CE8E2@esebe100.NOE.Nokia.com>
Thread-Topic: [newtrk] Question about Obsoleted vs. Historic
Thread-Index: AcWGMOwCX7TXQTpKRcu6r+y2un7TPQAbX4vA
To: hgs@cs.columbia.edu, brc@zurich.ibm.com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jul 2005 05:01:17.0531 (UTC) FILETIME=[BC7ED2B0:01C5869E]
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: newtrk@lists.uoregon.edu, blilly@erols.com, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [newtrk] Question about Obsoleted vs. Historic
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Henning,

> > No, lack of action by the community to request moving documents to 
> > Historic.
> 
> There seem to be a number of these housekeeping tasks that have almost 
> no benefit to the individual, have increasing costs and ever longer-term 
> commitments and thus, not surprisingly, don't get done on a regular 
> basis. Promotion and demotion of standards are prime examples, reviewing 
> is another.
> 
> Besides appealing to community spirit, other organizations deal with 
> that by deputizing individuals that get recognized for doing this type 
> of work in general, in one way or the other. This can take the "New 
> York's Strongest" (Dept. of Sanitation) or the "XYZ 
> secretary" approach.
> 
> In many cases, people do unpleasant or boring or no-immediate-reward 
> tasks in hope of getting promoted later - this is why I suggested WG 
> secretaries earlier and maybe why having elected IESG secretaries or the 
> IETF Dept. of Public Works ("just leave your old standards at the curb") 
> might be needed.

Have you seen draft-ietf-newtrk-cruft-00?  It proposes something along
these lines.

John

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf