[netmod] tree diagram guidelines

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Wed, 15 November 2017 09:14 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2BF11287A7 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 01:14:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id njJu5zcIdc5l for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 01:14:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BE35126C0F for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 01:14:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (h-40-225.A165.priv.bahnhof.se []) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 717961AE0311 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 10:14:54 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 10:14:54 +0100
Message-Id: <20171115.101454.1576716701146734257.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: netmod@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 24.5 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/Q9k5ZY0Xat52-r7MHAi8OO5LnkE>
Subject: [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 09:14:57 -0000


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.