Re: [netmod] tree diagram guidelines

Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com> Wed, 15 November 2017 10:53 UTC

Return-Path: <rwilton@cisco.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 B154B124BE8 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:53:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 BnI95l2CfjWX for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:53:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED5C1126CC7 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:53:34 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2280; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1510743215; x=1511952815; h=subject:to:references:from:cc:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cj1q/r/sRr70a9Q4nuXFqwym1UR8lKTnV0PVllvMnB0=; b=fw4itiVEYPpNXF38imcv9ijFKO9syxLc32CtVQxhNuInncw3Qb8T7QFL fjIu8cWDCot6Hb1nAG0g7YDCMAKprOqbICr/531G6iG0zYZI/Sq77vjCs PKJBiLw0Q/zOajAfgmQXfiJxH0Z5NOmOUASc7c38DYAcKNn24nkUTqmLv U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0C3AQBeHAxa/4sNJK1dGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQcBAQEBAYM2ZG4ng3+ZQIF9llqCEQoYC4RJTwKFB0EWAQEBAQEBAQEBayi?= =?us-ascii?q?FHwEBAQMBASEPAQU2CxALDgoCAiYCAicwBgEMBgIBAYogEKdggieLFwEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBGQWBD4IlggeBVYISgwGEZINJgmMFojeVBot/h0WOOYd?= =?us-ascii?q?0gTkmBiuBdDQhCB0VSYJkhGBANohhAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.44,398,1505779200"; d="scan'208";a="31180452"
Received: from alln-core-6.cisco.com ([173.36.13.139]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 15 Nov 2017 10:53:26 +0000
Received: from [10.24.103.1] ([10.24.103.1]) by alln-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vAFArOws027548; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 10:53:25 GMT
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, netmod@ietf.org
References: <20171115.101454.1576716701146734257.mbj@tail-f.com>
From: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <bb0f2cf8-ca46-21af-02cd-79970a08db7e@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 11:53:24 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20171115.101454.1576716701146734257.mbj@tail-f.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/bRj9Lmc8Yni5kSquFgpU0rGJ8Js>
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 10:53:37 -0000

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
> .
>