Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: <status-change-int-tlds-to-historic-00.txt> (Moving TCP.INT and NSAP.INT infrastructure domains to historic)

On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 4:02 PM, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 7:46 AM, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I do not think this last call is well-formed.  There is no link to the
>> document and it is not available via the datatracker.  It's difficult to
>> see how the community can successfully give advice on a matter with no
>> document (and not even an abstract).
>>
>> May I ask that the IESG consider re-issuing this last call with the
>> appropriate pointers?
>>
>
>
> This is probably my fault - we don't do very many status-changes, and
> figuring out how to drive the datatracker for this is hard — the DT usually
> sucks in the Abstract automatically and populates the Last Call text, but
> because a status-change document isn't *really* a document it didn't seem
> to do so…
>

Ah, I may have found an odd datatracker interaction — I went to restart the
IETF LC, and when I clicked "Reset to template text" it generated a much
more useful last call text:

"
The IESG has received a request from an individual participant to make the
following status changes:

- RFC1706 from Informational to Historic
    (DNS NSAP Resource Records)

- RFC1528 from Experimental to Historic
    (Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT <http://tpc.int/> Subdomain:
Remote Printing --
    Technical Procedures)

The supporting document for this request can be found here:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-int-tlds-to-historic/

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
last-call@ietf.org mailing lists by 2022-04-27. Exceptionally, comments may
be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning
of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

The affected documents can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc1706/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc1528/

IESG discussion of this request can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-int-tlds-to-historic/ballot/
"

This is what I was expecting the DT to send — hopefully this makes the
entire thing more clear. This Last Call was only supposed to be a support
document for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-davies-int-historic/ and
not actually *do* anything itself…

Anyway, I'll restart the IETF LC on this status change document with a
clarified LC text…

W

> With that said, this is **just** the Status-Change document, and there is
> a link to: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/
> status-change-int-tlds-to-historic/
>
> This notes that this document is the status-change (as suggested by
> https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/
> designating-rfcs-historic-2014-07-20/ and will be replaced when the
> "actual" document is published):
> "At some point, it is sent to an appropriate AD to request publication.
> The AD creates a status-change document, with an explanation that points to
> the I-D. The I-D and the status-change are then last-called together, after
> which the IESG evaluates and ballots on both."
>
> The **actual** document (which is also in Last Call) is https://
> datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-davies-int-historic/
>
> So, this just notes that draft-davies-int-historic
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-davies-int-historic/> is making
> some documents historic, and that you should read that. This whole change
> process is somewhat baroque, especially if there is a draft doing it —
> someone writes a draft, it gets last-called, and you *also* have a
> status-change document which also gets last-called, and then the
> status-change document disappears in a poof of smoke and the ID replaces it
> when it becomes an RFC….
>
> Anyway, I'll try abort this LC, and restart it with 1: TCP fixed to TPC
> (assuming that I can stop my fingers from autocorrecting it) and 2: the
> status-change text (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/
> status-change-int-tlds-to-historic/) copied into the Abstract / LC text…
>
> Wheee, are we having process fun yet? :-P
> W
>
>
>
>
>> thanks,
>>
>> Ted Hardie
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 4:08 PM The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The IESG has received a request from the Internet Engineering Steering
>>> Group
>>> IETF (iesg) to consider the following document: - 'Moving TCP.INT and
>>> NSAP.INT infrastructure domains to historic'
>>>   <status-change-int-tlds-to-historic-00.txt>
>>>
>>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
>>> final
>>> comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
>>> last-call@ietf.org mailing lists by 2022-04-26. Exceptionally, comments
>>> may
>>> be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
>>> beginning
>>> of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>>>
>>> Abstract
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The file can be obtained via
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-int-tlds-to-historic/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IETF-Announce mailing list
>>> IETF-Announce@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>>
>>