Re: [netmod] tree diagram guidelines

I am confused. I think there was some consensus to

- include all tree related guidelines in the tree document, remove all tree
  related guidelines from 6087bis and have 6087bis point to the tree document
  (which it already does)

The rest is pointless since AFAIK there is no wiki guidelines pages to
point to and there is AFAIK nobody in place to actually maintain such
a wiki page. Perhaps a wiki is the future but until future has
arrived, we should not point to it.

The other proposal I heard was to have a landing page that points to
the current guideline work which points to the relevant documents. A
wiki pointing to RFCs and ID, not RFC pointing to wikis. So this does not
affect the documents.

/js

PS: I am happy to add pointers to guidelines as a section to the
    wikipedia page.

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 07:42:33AM +0800, Lou Berger wrote:
> To circle back to this.  My sense of this discussion (as contributor) is
> (a) the tree diagrams draft should be updated to point to a "guidelines"
> wiki page for "the most current guidelines"
> (b) the tree diagrams draft should be updated to include a full set of the
> current tree related guidelines
> (c) 6087bis should be updated to point to a "guidelines" wiki page for "the
> most current guidelines"
> (d) 6087bis should have it's tree guidelines point to the tree diagrams
> document -- in addition to pointing to the wiki
> 
> Does this sound right?
> 
> Lou
> (as tree co-author)
> 
> On 11/16/2017 11:04 AM, Mehmet Ersue wrote:
> > The Wiki is useful as a starting point providing a collection of pointers to guideline RFCs and the bis-revisions in development.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Mehmet
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mahesh
> > > Jethanandani
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 7:39 AM
> > > To: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
> > > Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> > > Subject: Re: [netmod] tree diagram guidelines
> > > 
> > > Other SDOs can and follow the work in IETF through the RFCs we publish.
> > > They do not follow wiki’s, unless the document itself says, “here are the
> > > guidelines, but if you are looking for the latest, go to this wiki”. I therefore
> > > would support the proposal outlined below. It gives the SDO a stable point of
> > > reference with a document, which gets updated occasionally, but also allows
> > > them to peak at what is coming down the pipeline.
> > > 
> > > Thanks.
> > > 
> > > > On Nov 15, 2017, at 6:53 PM, Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 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
> > > 
> > > Mahesh Jethanandani
> > > mjethanandani@gmail.com
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>