IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ext] Re: [rfc-i] Evolving document sources over a long time (Re: Comments on draft-roach-bis-documents-00)

"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Thu, 23 May 2019 11:05 UTC

Return-Path: <agmalis@gmail.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 828C5120019 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 May 2019 04:05:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 orL5I6qHE-2r for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 May 2019 04:05:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72f.google.com (mail-qk1-x72f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72f]) (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 B1BB612002F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 May 2019 04:05:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72f.google.com with SMTP id o2so3185486qkb.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 May 2019 04:05:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MLFWFUHMYri6oEjr/ikaStDpDWIS/X8uqVVq33Tmy/A=; b=bVfkPgCcYcylHHqH6k19sUmnLDHZg1A3ZehN5kHv0KOWre3cnmHtRHWUHC9k87nCei nYKQquEo9hBzGImpEbZcSQynal2yrY3XpJIJAl+GjWWZBGw2X/vaeqQ9BOmrKbvf0ND0 dmXapcri/DsMBMYZveYegyfoDuYEKQ3xiYSKfyV2aQ5Rr0U3G95gIMGl9IuKx4FIgu/j OeBjT5Cs1keBI75pShQULvUfbWKfVLsd56KRZR90ckddaNEeNTA32IYy1vqRnbG5lzsI FcbiN5hUzhGg75yp8W9rc87vtIC14Vivd6dCRWfZo+Zhe2cWyAg66TLId8LLo4kltiZH bxYA==
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=MLFWFUHMYri6oEjr/ikaStDpDWIS/X8uqVVq33Tmy/A=; b=pbr0BTH4hDr/5ecM40WZJh5Q2N6cFxy08zp7OcjSQf3eNEOul3Wxoywla/D7JqVEmp iUwjjtYj2SW5GNFGdD51F+unZGTr1XEN/S5O1eaeAhrjuNuXXWF9S7gU1wH3P8ilVq3H fs120tI1zmaq8F8pNjhWnfoG0xTOiIKoduoK1T3kijw3gopo5JOScRkHhVboqUDqsWVm XESBUxr4h0co6hNtRSX5LDo+FR+CKYo0q2Q1YPSBgkymV1CQiK9ta6bqKijGfhIXpNoJ 1kSnFEntCJ3HP38pxzM5DleKniGueFlC34R8/nBip6rzTFeRJcFwf7sREYvQPg3ZpKZk Pnkg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVX7Vyz2bgi3tJ2IqESbTyZXHqAOJNnJrCN7IZ3dIRTbr2g9SiV IoLl/8or3Guv6px97aagW8lxq/imDuPsr5xqFX4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzJtDPk5DcBF7IeQna0p5z1+fB5BhU/xnFvounwdH/H7SEMjDQOuLTU47We7PtS3WfDt0tUYGJ8ZW7Ea7HMS/A=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:11ae:: with SMTP id c14mr8448587qkk.85.1558609514691; Thu, 23 May 2019 04:05:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CADaq8jdRMUZAN3rRXoActXqvGpkgx_-kW67uwzGLtVPoh7LfAQ@mail.gmail.com> <6E787E2A-18F2-4EFE-BFBA-61B1B4300930@tzi.org> <CADaq8jc1KJwC=Ypoo9a+-=Me=GP5tgX=2kcfUd56o53Mcu05kw@mail.gmail.com> <9179590B-C513-44DC-906C-16534DA8EC51@tzi.org> <1852d84b-48cc-0129-3564-6ec9b92c4315@gmx.de> <8A7B4E94-DBCD-4EE3-8FEA-EA642F1071BF@tzi.org> <CADaq8jeLwELxGM_zWG_OhiZ3nkm_F_a7A71B7aEv+xDdBmhYqg@mail.gmail.com> <CADaq8jciU-yC1KDmXfYc7rqc9vtS0c3D_fWeFN=GEw4bxchMkA@mail.gmail.com> <74f72a19-a400-1cf2-a2a0-5abbf3646b43@nostrum.com> <866F6E4F-C640-46A6-AADF-EC4C81F44B7D@iana.org> <CADaq8jcARXdm=x5xcCurPnRfORApcnHQL2-n-ccfSSQT3V1Twg@mail.gmail.com> <CAA=duU1+Re=EiAiPkLCm3MHrHthwy4OUhzx0qvKxam2GVnd=fA@mail.gmail.com> <00df01d5113d$49183c60$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <CAA=duU1PyCRgnm3ip8GkTzEuLRC3hquvJRv_K511Xd45DCEd7A@mail.gmail.com> <d3a0b3bd-ba90-1655-a0cf-ad2af3cc6202@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <d3a0b3bd-ba90-1655-a0cf-ad2af3cc6202@gmx.de>
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 07:05:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CAA=duU1=nJbz-rcCnDJ0Bq6xqbPGjS1rJ5azcnX3m7e_63fnzA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [rfc-i] Evolving document sources over a long time (Re: Comments on draft-roach-bis-documents-00)
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>, David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>, Michelle Cotton <michelle.cotton@iana.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000077815e05898c0ef0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ztWgDt88aVR5JyeVkjo5qOT4qeI>
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: Thu, 23 May 2019 11:05:20 -0000

Julian,

My understanding of the goal in draft-roach-bis-documents is to make the
bis RFC as close to the original as possible, including formatting (modulo
changes resulting from tooling changes), so that you don't need linking or
to look in multiple places.

This would include a complete view of all IANA actions related to the
protocol in one place. draft-roach wants to completely replace the original
RFC with the bis, not just update it.

Cheers,
Andy


On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 5:46 AM Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
wrote:

> On 23.05.2019 11:30, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
> > Tom,
> >
> > I think you might have misunderstood my suggestion. To make it more
> > concrete, let's say that we're creating RFC 1234bis to replace RFC 1234.
> >
> > Then RFC 1234bis's IANA considerations section would have two
> subsections:
> >
> > - What IANA Now Needs to Do (these are new actions resulting from the
> > bis document)
> >
> > - What IANA Already Did in RFC 1234 (what IANA originally did, the
> > original text from RFC 1234)
> >
> > That way you don't have to look in two places (RFC 1234bis and RFC 1234)
> > to see everything that IANA did, both historically and now.
>
> Understood - but why is that actually important enough to drag the old
> information in? Wouldn't be linking to it be sufficient? Also, doesn't
> it give the potentially incorrect impression that this is a complete
> view of all IANA actions related to the protocol?
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email