Re: Visibility of current RFC Maturity Levels (and how they got there (was: Re: Last Call: Moving RFC 4405, RFC 4406, RFC 4407 (Sender-ID) to Historic)
"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 15 May 2018 16:21 UTC
Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 7720012D77D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 May 2018 09:21:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=lgAS9csx; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=C6zELIrt
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 IVozVw4NjHSt for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 May 2018 09:21:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 E892312DA4F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 May 2018 09:21:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 24403 invoked from network); 15 May 2018 16:21:02 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=5f51.5afb08ee.k1805; bh=hQ548wGdyuk4geqR4njwQQ3F93TAfetZ4gxfRXkoGVU=; b=lgAS9csxjRRxSPiGe3S97VB3npDy2aTxWM96XVxtJIqY+P5bA+ZhcFypvy1/DpDs+0Ngamj3wkSxqxqirHj/U0zHEEn8xDIcushQVgE+dZMvyPRMVwdYk+ttogXP3pYx+5qJXY8+6WrPq14peWR4UxllHmOxF0dnSPBm9RoqwIbKp+pKZrGOPrBWb+ivYRo3eVL6WHKykMYS8FcUZic6SVac85UJLEqkGON5Rz7I1UULgg3cjIzSZRYfES3p2Euv
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=5f51.5afb08ee.k1805; bh=hQ548wGdyuk4geqR4njwQQ3F93TAfetZ4gxfRXkoGVU=; b=C6zELIrt6B9KfnFb3L01weIkk0IVqNxt9Ww1y/Ydc6DkIHEQ27loBk3uCoWuh8L15v+fr1aHG0utyKfxpqjpqioU5b8tn/4sQ0EdRsfwynWT2Y4AJhFOmUi2X9yd03yXsBS/9F13vNrKdq1zRgo9u2JuEAi5jTH15TfTFNeo1tF+W4AZewJPT61tbD4/7ArUPlnEawGw2JlJ/QzPSBz1JmxozxlxNVyPy+roJd7FgCMo6KmT5MBfRtjFAOG9+0PJ
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2/X.509/AEAD) via TCP6; 15 May 2018 16:21:01 -0000
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 12:21:01 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1805151214420.44156@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Visibility of current RFC Maturity Levels (and how they got there (was: Re: Last Call: Moving RFC 4405, RFC 4406, RFC 4407 (Sender-ID) to Historic)
In-Reply-To: <20180515160936.GD2249@kduck.kaduk.org>
References: <CAKKJt-fcvUhQdDykv8mzS_a+AgAQO0jMBfK+zVk++FD=1+7w5w@mail.gmail.com> <a71ae235-57ca-1350-b4d7-36c78986cb5b@gmail.com> <20180515160936.GD2249@kduck.kaduk.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (OSX 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/los2ozJSdiKXsrTMqd9gE2BZQRQ>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 15 May 2018 16:21:05 -0000
> For me as an AD, I am either looking at the tools.ietf.org HTML > version or the datatracker page, or I am lamenting Google's > algorithm that placed me somewhere else. But I don't know what > "people in general" are "reasonably expecting" to do; perhaps the > RFC Editor's plain-text repository remains canonical in usage as > well as in archival status, even if it is not for me. (It's also > unclear how useful http/rsync/etc access logs would be for trying to > answer this question.) I use rsync and find stuff using rfc-index.txt and rfc-index.xml. Those have the obsoletes and updates links but no URLs. Dunno how typical it is, but it's very convenient. The full archive including all the bulky postscript is about .5GB, not much these days. Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
- Visibility of current RFC Maturity Levels (and ho… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Visibility of current RFC Maturity Levels (an… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Visibility of current RFC Maturity Levels (an… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: Visibility of current RFC Maturity Levels (an… Barry Leiba
- Re: Visibility of current RFC Maturity Levels (an… John R Levine
- Re: Visibility of current RFC Maturity Levels (an… tom p.
- Re: Visibility of current RFC Maturity Levels (an… Julian Reschke
- Re: Visibility of current RFC Maturity Levels (an… Barry Leiba