Re: [netmod] tree diagram guidelines

Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com> Wed, 15 November 2017 23:39 UTC

Return-Path: <mjethanandani@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 C2E7D127876 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:39:29 -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 I19ZFsO_zS2W for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:39:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg0-x234.google.com (mail-pg0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::234]) (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 A9CB4126CD8 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:39:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg0-x234.google.com with SMTP id 4so10266165pge.1 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:39:27 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=zOK3KEmasNDdtEezknZidVXGeoWtkrzW9PelV3Mdaqo=; b=Q8plQIRuOvOHVut9lviB0vSx+8LXJqQma7MRZHxte2CDjZ2FRUPBpdWmk7qx4fNKrz CNgqRa2LsonyhB0nh9KBg8kDdfZNFDBD8prj5V/QtwbWgIWut9Bazeh0YtapAg5uiUej MfX/DqpgKl17IQwAw24wde0lmasp6ZkBGL/Nuhux7AwfoPhgH8gyya+HDAQuDdIK59iP FTvXdc4y5pvQNNz13xGDxGHu2E1yZ+QsVdB8+zixW0PSoX/KXtv5CIRxy2kCNhDq78fN 5qGKZuxQ4JqGvTJbiEkqtKSFzgu/DmKrNHejHtqsFj0ZIqczoM/Jr6RMD5TUBg1T4jH3 SfIQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=zOK3KEmasNDdtEezknZidVXGeoWtkrzW9PelV3Mdaqo=; b=cHB+MdqzTt9820mMfQhMUVKdKUvxIUNMkZs4HFEvFAypiZMqNhkP7gRHeZymfXWBbV APtElYpiKfAEzlvJuVeKkNq8J/IjfzE+T0GDFnRkO5oSF4/3jbUHW1DLg1PnOjiK+OCE IFnsqsxX/6n/o2k4CBk8IvcnAPgn9Q2EOvQphlNKlIGx3QFwEAGxegp7F3zbUij9mcJZ jPI8zzoXnLAhjwtO0fBvGn7WXhHec36dhkCqbepfYfjSFEScf4TBtDIWot58kWOkG10n oKAggGuPZ/ccq21jpwSkZPvn0AzACHnSVG2M+DiBrq6whFMErZ2+9RwJ/WooNEZEL80n SFaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4wpr5n2M7l8VM2LD0lfvDijB7KjbDhAn/A3rnOxFPnL/W6Wac2 TNuHwFoSbYzSiN8dqln1xZgUz29aF1k=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYZSccdD/P1nTqEgCJnGwfhP1eUmFrJNauTSnG9nZ2UnTJGJBeNLQyxhWGwLAgQOk4We30prg==
X-Received: by 10.101.82.129 with SMTP id y1mr17441726pgp.137.1510789167171; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:39:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-927c.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-927c.meeting.ietf.org. [31.133.146.124]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y27sm43764610pfi.107.2017.11.15.15.39.24 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:39:25 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <bb0f2cf8-ca46-21af-02cd-79970a08db7e@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 07:39:23 +0800
Cc: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, netmod@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0696749C-0E80-40CC-9905-BD8187CB6D78@gmail.com>
References: <20171115.101454.1576716701146734257.mbj@tail-f.com> <bb0f2cf8-ca46-21af-02cd-79970a08db7e@cisco.com>
To: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/W71tigG7h5_d7sZOWqsj-zQ3rlU>
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 23:39:30 -0000

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