Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION REQUEST - pingback

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 21 April 2011 06:23 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC3CAE0690 for <link-relations@ietfc.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:23:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.728
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.728 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.129, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2jcqyhTJzbcs for <link-relations@ietfc.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:23:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E9BEE066C for <link-relations@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:23:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from chancetrain-lm.mnot.net (unknown [118.209.5.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8C401509D9; Thu, 21 Apr 2011 02:23:22 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <4D9E0844.50808@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 16:23:19 +1000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4B908F60-1368-4C34-82D8-B74F8B0211E5@mnot.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1008102113040.11992@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <69D54950-1FE2-4714-9FED-569142BBF1A4@mnot.net> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1008110320320.11977@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <B287E435-5C63-448B-ACD9-E3319FCDBF14@mnot.net> <4D9E0844.50808@gmx.de>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, link-relations@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION REQUEST - pingback
X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <link-relations.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/link-relations>
List-Post: <mailto:link-relations@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 06:23:25 -0000

There's some discussion currently going on about making updating the registries easier, with simplified procedures for corrections, updates, etc.

If/when that happens, I'm thinking that a reference to Ian's site (or similar) isn't problematic, as the main problem -- that it may become unavailable if something happens to Ian -- isn't such an issue. 

Make sense?

Cheers,


On 08/04/2011, at 4:53 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> On 11.08.2010 05:35, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> ...
>> If you meet the "RFC or Open Standard" test, it's possible to register it.
>> 
>> Note that publishing on the independent submission Informational RFC track isn't really "through the IETF process" -- it's at the discretion of the RFC Editor, which is a separate entity. See:
>>   http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html
>>   http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4846
>>   http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5742
>> 
>> While I can't say that it's necessarily a quick process, the amount of work involved (beyond draft formatting) is relatively low, and there are a few upsides, including:
>> 
>> 1) RFCs are institutionally guaranteed not to change over time; you say that the spec is frozen, but there aren't checks or balances, nor conventions in place, to prevent future changes.
>> 2) When you die and your Web site disappears, an RFC will have a better chance of persisting in an unambiguous state.
>> ...
> 
> Assuming we are ok with the content, but not with the *location* of the spec, there may be an easy way to fix this.
> 
> For instance,
> 
> - use <http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090228033516/http://hixie.ch/specs/pingback/pingback> as reference, or
> 
> - have Ian send the spec as attachment to the www-archive mailing list, and then link to the attachment in the mail archive.
> 
> Best regards, Julian

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/