Re: [netmod] tree diagram guidelines

"Mehmet Ersue" <mersue@gmail.com> Wed, 15 November 2017 15:27 UTC

Return-Path: <mersue@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9F0E1204DA for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 07:27:53 -0800 (PST)
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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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=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 P5a3l1WPPCTi for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 07:27:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf0-x22d.google.com (mail-pf0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::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 F2B7D1200FC for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 07:27:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id q4so9121762pfg.13 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 07:27:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:thread-index:content-language; bh=TNMUfuDmpP4hpDcXVBdcxi45NxBWubQdNNGzUsw+JnU=; b=HdH8Rro2vsVZardCOH2gYLI/1rB5g5cAeskrqOUxLM5MK9fpRWGrWJKrKE46kD6a/e 2Ym27nrDPoJ8jGX0wRckNj+NqcEqoXjpj2s+r7DiRVhPqZnSkak428rGFj5/3EY8gl1n CGysQNeKFJwyc7iDkSEmj9NNnXw+dpBtGNOMmwxgEia5Arm/SkSHvowatAJdEhPteUbC Rhvy6Pw2RJd0lyufMShB8uxshXofs5I4eQ16y4GXYqbGsGNfBGyal2HnUUbDgGvQHTDN qDth9KlulTFcwXSsoQq1YoJqU/DwscUUv/JBUGuSb6OzWzjMUu8sM0VxMRmDaSkOjdaR oHmA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index :content-language; bh=TNMUfuDmpP4hpDcXVBdcxi45NxBWubQdNNGzUsw+JnU=; b=lCihFEtWyZyn1II56GaHjKm5CJQRjBmS6Q47ExQ6Z+qKwSyDU7dZy1Y9Muu8nyx8LR woJ9oaUfdf1FW1OWkm7KAfx0AVxz9FkEAdlFYxfSNBBZVzvVBnp/t6jmpcG0Ga8y1Wz2 E2m5FVlzK7ZdodoX37t9iiHLHO4gfyTAiO0t0LHSrLS2BAcpWR6Hlz9aSyHSkCtN2xzF EN9itfurbulb9QO+HQsMmKLVC1Zg3uRVStP7ZdjZObiXUDiZO5JTaYzgEUMWVxl/hWIp Vf3mOBny2czcXVW5qH4KjeIz/onbMfDgZqlcmiLgciEO6uWzvaeGVUBDxzbSD49ZIETP 3JMw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX6dBuaAGdma2qR6nozv79c9yWZo36JAtgQxMNO9kFH/vn43IIgi XbNRkuu5+EXSUZjb2ZHG2JZ63Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMa7ihZEmEMnmFLuWQfYxtChwqpMLF8rbMPXVHK2qQeBEUv4Wdlcf7WYRszFa0eokPrNoLI62A==
X-Received: by 10.159.233.198 with SMTP id b6mr3935168plr.350.1510759671562; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 07:27:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from DESKTOPFLHJVQJ ([2001:67c:1232:144:6d1f:df87:592f:459b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t9sm36853382pgr.3.2017.11.15.07.27.49 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 15 Nov 2017 07:27:50 -0800 (PST)
From: "Mehmet Ersue" <mersue@gmail.com>
To: "'Robert Wilton'" <rwilton@cisco.com>, "'Martin Bjorklund'" <mbj@tail-f.com>, <netmod@ietf.org>
References: <20171115.101454.1576716701146734257.mbj@tail-f.com> <bb0f2cf8-ca46-21af-02cd-79970a08db7e@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <bb0f2cf8-ca46-21af-02cd-79970a08db7e@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 23:27:49 +0800
Message-ID: <00f201d35e26$4d6d4010$e847c030$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQGxefq6yqyvOLF6jhxyeqpBlh8GFwHgxCcMo0pQdmA=
Content-Language: de
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/193ghnIM0rDu4YSuCzkpt2tnq1Q>
Subject: Re: [netmod] tree diagram guidelines
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:27:54 -0000

Hi All,

I think having the tree-related guidelines in the tree draft and finalizing 6087bis as planned is useful.
That said a NETMOD wiki explaining the available guidelines with pointers can be used as a starting point and would be additionally helpful.

Mehmet

> -----Original Message-----
> From: netmod [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert
> Wilton
> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 6:53 PM
> To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>; netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod] tree diagram guidelines
> 
> I liked the suggestion from Chris Hopps:
> 
> I think that it was along the lines of ...
> 
> The RFC contains a reference at the top that states that updates to the
> guidelines is available on a wiki at ....
> 
> Every few years the guidelines on the wiki can be folded into a latest version
> of the guidelines draft.
> 
> 6087bis looks to be 3.5 years old.  Should folks, e.g. at BBF,, IEEE, or MEF be
> using the latest draft guidelines, or should then use the published RFC until
> 6087bis is actually republshed?
> 
> Thanks,
> Rob
> 
> 
> On 15/11/2017 10:14, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > There was a proposal in the meeting today to have the guidelines for
> > tree diagrams in a wiki, instead of having them in 6087bis or in the
> > tree diagram document.
> >
> > Was the proposal really to have a wiki for just the tree guidelines,
> > or was the proposal to withdraw 6087bis from the process and instead
> > publish all guidelines as a wiki?
> >
> > If it is the former, is it really worth it?
> >
> > Advantages with a wiki:
> >
> >    +  It can be updated more easily
> >
> > Some drawbacks:
> >
> >    -  It can be updated more easily
> >       (meaning they are less stable)
> >
> >    -  Wikis tend to not be alive after some time, and are not that
> >       easy to find.  Just try to find the various YANG-related wikis
> >       we've tried to maintain over the years.
> >
> >    -  Links in RFCs also have problems.  Sites are re-orginized etc.
> >       As an example, the link to the security guidelines template in
> >       RFC 6087 doesn't work anymore.
> >
> >    -  People that are looking for a stable reference will have problems
> >       (I think Rob mentioned that IEEE still refer to RFC 6087 (which
> >       is understandable; that's the published version).
> >
> >    -  Who maintains the Wiki, and what are the rules for updating it?
> >
> >
> > I suggest we have the tree-related guidelines (actually just a few
> > sentences) in the tree draft, and since 6087bis already refers to this
> > document it is not a big problem that guidelines are spread out over
> > several documents that are difficult to find.
> >
> >
> >
> > /martin
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > netmod mailing list
> > netmod@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> > .
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod