IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: is there a specific proposal for living ops docs?

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Sat, 20 July 2019 18:39 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.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 941031200A3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Jul 2019 11:39:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 MjnGYcKTshk0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Jul 2019 11:39:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (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 3AA4612006E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Jul 2019 11:39:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1houGs-0005dV-Ou; Sat, 20 Jul 2019 18:39:52 +0000
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2019 14:39:36 -0400
Message-ID: <m2imrwv9cn.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
Cc: Job Snijders <job@instituut.net>, IETF Rinse Repeat <ietf@ietf.org>, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Subject: Re: is there a specific proposal for living ops docs?
In-Reply-To: <0FE0532C-28AF-47F6-8BED-D5C3E05216D1@puck.nether.net>
References: <F2D5DCCF-4051-444B-9522-9E11F9F93005@fugue.com> <869599E9-7571-4677-AB9A-961027549C54@network-heretics.com> <144ff436-a7a2-22f7-7b06-4d0b3bcfefac@joelhalpern.com> <20190719041456.GL33367@vurt.meerval.net> <254fc5f6-3576-a62f-b84f-a7c5d29b0055@joelhalpern.com> <a1561aa7-5f41-0e2a-1892-cfb587196ac0@gmail.com> <C3D53639-C2C0-42CE-9708-99294091E012@puck.nether.net> <a17a8648-14c8-1889-4ee3-86996ff6281e@gmail.com> <3B0C189A-D56B-430F-82FF-19DE0DC788DE@puck.nether.net> <BA80E73F53C26B9191294131@JcK-HP5.jck.com> <20190719190534.GG38674@shrubbery.net> <4f43fac6-ed7f-08ca-d5da-1e84b0a7b12b@network-heretics.com> <3a678b4a-1c9e-8a2a-ea02-ac32a07f3711@gmail.com> <CACWOCC8g_YXT9OU6NxuhFGkxuejxux_ykoKfA7i8cmZ73nWjeg@mail.gmail.com> <m2muh8valj.wl-randy@psg.com> <0FE0532C-28AF-47F6-8BED-D5C3E05216D1@puck.nether.net>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/26.2 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/tQgmVyvmRbYgegEcDv-TPO4zM1M>
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: Sat, 20 Jul 2019 18:39:56 -0000

>>>> That's exactly why I asked about RIPE's solution. Before proposing
>>>> a solution, don't we want to study one that apparently works?
>>> Works by what metric?
>> worked for us in publishing an op doc which was eventually followed by
>> an rfc
> I think an example of a RFC of this sort is 2182/BCP-16.

uh, non sequitur.  the subject was ripe docs working.  2182 was never a
ripe doc, and the ietf pub cycle was just fine for it.

but maybe folk could get the point here if (the metaphorical) you could
point to an example op doc which is needed asap, is in good shape, and
ietf rfc processing would cause ops issues.  a real example, might help.

randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email