Re: [Int-area] What is in a name - draft-ietf-intarea-schc-ip-protocol-number

[Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 5:17 AM tom petch <[e-mail]> wrote:

> From: Robert Moskowitz <[e-mail]>
> Sent: 05 April 2023 18:58
>
> The origin draft only was discussing SCHC as an IP Protocol Number.
>
> At IETF115, the attendees agreed that the draft needs to be expanded to
> also SCHC as an Ethertype and as a UDP Port Number.
>
> Thus the old draft name no longer reflects the new content.
>
> <tp>
> A very common state of affairs in the IETF.  If the name changed for every
> semantic change then some I-D would go through a large number of names
> before making it to RFC which would make it hard for anyone to find out
> what has happened.  I recall an AD losing track of what had been proposed
> because they did not realise that there had been a name change.
>
> The I-D title matters, that is there for the long haul.



> The I-D file name is a temporary identifier that should follow the
> requirements for an identifier, a key one of which is stability and a key
> one which is not is for the name to be updated if some part of the
> semantics change.



And another key one is being subject to maximum of 55 characters


  I am happy to see protocol number as encompassing an Ethertype protocol
> number, a media type protocol number, an interface protocol number and so
> on so see no need to change.
>
>
Wholeheartedly agree.
We should not have to change the I-D file name.

Behcet


> </rant>
>
> Tom Petch
>
> p.s.  I could tell you about a scientific (in)discipline where a small
> group  feed their egos by changing identifiers every few years thereby
> rendering the literature, where a name could appear a million times, hard
> to use for those of us who have been around for a while and ever more
> difficult to access for students in future (which is how to feed an ego)
> but I will leave that for another day.
>
>
> There is a
> mechanism when you submit a draft to link it to a prior draft so the
> draft history is properly maintained (it does not support linking to
> multiple prior drafts or splitting an old draft into multiple, for that
> you have to ask for human help).
>
> So the new draft name will reflect the new draft content.
>
> I just don't have enough time to get content into the new draft prior to
> Passover Holiday start.  I hope to get it done during the middle days,
> say Sunday.  Stay tuned.  Pascal Thubert is helping me with the new
> content.  Particularly the specific content needed to liason with IEEE
> 802 on the Ethertype.
>
> Bob
>
> On 4/5/23 11:49, tom petch wrote:
> > From: Int-area <[e-mail]> on behalf of Robert
> Moskowitz <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: 05 April 2023 12:22
> >
> > I am in the process of reving draft
> >
> > draft-ietf-intarea-schc-ip-protocol-number
> >
> > and adding support for schc as an ethertype and tcp/udp port number as I
> > said I would do back in Nov.  Sigh.
> >
> > So what to name the new draft?
> >
> > <tp>
> > If you are producing a new version of
> draft-ietf-intarea-schc-ip-protocol-number-00 then I would call it
> draft-ietf-intarea-schc-ip-protocol-number-01.  I do not see any other
> logical choice.
> >
> > Tom Petch
> >
> >
> >
> > draft-ietf-intarea-schc-protocol-numbers
> >
> > ??
> >
> > Alternatives?
> >
> > Thanks and now back to my writing as I really want to get an update out
> > today before Holidays...
> >
> > Bob
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Int-area mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>