Re: Evolving Documents (nee "Living Documents") side meeting at IETF105.

Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> Wed, 03 July 2019 20:23 UTC

Return-Path: <rlb@ipv.sx>
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 241C91200C7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jul 2019 13:23:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ipv-sx.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 bmxpO6iF4cPS for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jul 2019 13:23:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi1-x22d.google.com (mail-oi1-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A64D1200D7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Jul 2019 13:23:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi1-x22d.google.com with SMTP id w196so3140362oie.7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 03 Jul 2019 13:23:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipv-sx.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=6a2ttPy3rFMZ59FT9nUKXXSEWgbX7qocZoqqHVz88gI=; b=MfEEAo+RtjURe0AtMm3iqs/Wg6qCF7yMOiSZLFrTZMPGYBzscYucLiHPY81OO29cXq cuvHwfmyUPihSvANTFnkmGarPtG2HvR6S2i+dd+Twvn65OqbI8MECytAfivexxvBRrak /i+3aFI8HBDa3f2wlR4lJi3zAE1GP+M2pjp7DwmM9cJembODqXoA0PolWGr649xt8IKT Yaw8XCKskr4xxMUT7uhOkOmljx1oQFsVy2uj2sKHL4dAWyV02NEenBwztOjJvVWOJVKv 5gtTjaZtwVlc+Z2CrpUSsiQuHgknd1BRhvTkAkCy5sn5y5dGnNlm03H/0FYDzk8X2Hrs Dpig==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6a2ttPy3rFMZ59FT9nUKXXSEWgbX7qocZoqqHVz88gI=; b=KRvFhZshTPLQGkwfr6svS/oeDDQrAo+6Fgfh+bDp/c7G6HNTgiTVq0P8d/T5CD6+Jk ZbIOkQ3k3DIG6kLaYj/9tIuyq2RqilKCtyOFUZSySM8/n+2SZNp5IMVV3eBuNoKKeNOK mMQjqAf3NhKKN3kUp12n8qDVJYRJCI4B7m0bTS+GA3gU4xLPvVLe1Ix2rEfApNyRt7Sp m2PFSKv3g9BhlYcEzY7KpUjRgRDVuOoye8dcdNpG2vwJ1HglkX4Frs4ZEdKK8G0sfrz1 NQ5hq8wpC7r5p6kMKsvAC2fNCi6tpjmTQ1Ct8kKpq6mFKQv2jrK0hbDnQoZEoKBPOzLQ FaZw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU0UEa6MDJiINbbzgnZYXIStQ0jMt5pm+g8DpXyfejPAUmhAbAg DBk/uxXK8RRmcmy6mLdXI19jBPViq9cjq/4m3q+Kjw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy3MoZ+cQF9n+buXeFvR7CO3t5hnH9R0d/IL8g9Gwxdps/AQQv/NAv+DP/snXrEDKYxs6XP6gi/nU/puNBaJ24=
X-Received: by 2002:aca:f1c4:: with SMTP id p187mr191821oih.149.1562185396568; Wed, 03 Jul 2019 13:23:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHw9_iKv7xDY-rT98F_BAEvGOGbWGL7UpXS42rSVLsHB+=SOZg@mail.gmail.com> <4567879e-aa29-aeae-72e9-33d148d30eed@network-heretics.com> <CAL02cgToQWmOrfOxS_dc4KRtT9e0PXNzmhWZHkRUyV_3V=E-mQ@mail.gmail.com> <0856af71-4d84-09d1-834d-12ac7252420c@network-heretics.com>
In-Reply-To: <0856af71-4d84-09d1-834d-12ac7252420c@network-heretics.com>
From: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2019 16:23:01 -0400
Message-ID: <CAL02cgQ9qWVUTPW=Cpx=r32k3i1PLgfp5ax0pKMdH0nKObcKTg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Evolving Documents (nee "Living Documents") side meeting at IETF105.
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a2da4d058ccca178"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/vWkq7mdoaD_sVh0r-IWPYXH_dV8>
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, 03 Jul 2019 20:23:19 -0000

On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 4:18 PM Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
wrote:

> On 7/3/19 4:15 PM, Richard Barnes wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 4:10 PM Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 7/3/19 4:04 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:
>>
>> > Hi there all,
>> >
>> > TL;DR: Being able to mark a specific version of an *Internet Draft* as
>> > “stable” would often be useful. By encoding information in the name
>> > (stable-foo-bar-00) we can do this.
>> >
>> > Heather and I will be holding a side meeting at IETF 105 to discuss
>> > the idea and get feedback.
>> > When: Tue, July 23, 3:00pm – 4:30pm
>> > Where: C2 (21st Floor)
>>
>> It seems to me that this would defeat the entire purpose of
>> Internet-Drafts and serve to circumvent the IETF process.    There
>> should be no expectation of stability until a document has reached
>> IETF-wide consensus.
>>
>
> Why is it necessary to conjoin those two things?
>
>
> Because a working group does not have the authority to make such decisions
> on its own.   To the extent that it would be desirable to invest such
> authority in some body for some specific purpose, a working group is the
> wrong kind of body to do that.   The norms around IETF WG operation aren't
> the right ones for such a body.
>

Doesn't have the authority to publish stable specifications?  Obviously, a
WG can't publish something and claim it has consensus or is an RFC.  But
WGs already have the ability to publish stable docs, by publishing them on
github or on IPFS.  This is just about making them easier to find and
reference.

I think maybe you're over-inflating the significance of this proposal.

--Richard