Re: [netmod] tree diagram guidelines

"Mehmet Ersue" <mersue@gmail.com> Fri, 17 November 2017 00:53 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 9C21D126CB6 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 16:53:42 -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 2c18VTJ5H44h for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 16:53:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf0-x22e.google.com (mail-pf0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22e]) (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 524A6126BF0 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 16:53:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id i15so658183pfa.3 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 16:53:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :thread-index; bh=8t5pPY8BeY3yt9D4h+kfAW9Kg2vBx4C63CD8UwE9e9k=; b=JnDCvlySNs6FvGK4rn3hO4uRm/XVB4HfQeEKvOBdiXglkqi32GlrtKHo6a9+mYoaTT qv5/NzQJFmkk/3NeeeWIbvsueyyBiLMzb7KjYngTHR7aDUGJXuhfsylnXPigZWw+PbxP qNh/qSW8fVmEaB6zVx8qA5RmQCcPXQWg4/o+/dU8V6h4k9PRyclbIjp50uY9c7iMRLYQ 7/E5ZnyiJbh1BrTAY1Ld2yK9L7EcXVWYKfaD8Vjopa8aZPB/uld3s33gA3Oj7R+IrwM4 Gd2w08oGZkLo0Nq/QyaGm6tql6IdPCQ6STo2APVjdbwmeJKtvOr23p77MKOpPEaNjM8V vI3Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :thread-index; bh=8t5pPY8BeY3yt9D4h+kfAW9Kg2vBx4C63CD8UwE9e9k=; b=TAON93tIxpH2OziBj6RtRGAd87dFZUAD4ebOx6/Y7UeSxXOxvQAlT2cjDRQrSKrpMK DkdCtBFpoW8yVFXQ/AZdTAcuR0NNEWOgVHgUmdd7nuMwXEXDOV4D1pIM7nBpBu8IxPcV YbWZxZWTT6/p+JnPvslnVh28KhHjR18vsPGKZNtqie9oPVv5tC2XPUMzpIS61Ip0+jJR tJD0FUd5a2xNVePVzyO4Zav0YzKszSs4YN0h1oUSCWfbWD2qOUhcvymhO6ZUB5I+rePX jJHYmxWg1ljlGJgsr9mvK84ebUzxdZHKzN+Acp46r9WfSCKQIpTCiXgDqf6hH4I8fuHR iNKQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX5V3jeojqlBENxjoPbKNVLi98QvpsOgHeqAuk7Fzk/2PAXelmzo 37nJE/OdBq+bpTJLAMEcGo4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYRV2TAkGLzeeDppUYEEgz6vPvX8awHqH4Gjfu5sdAWVdhQNjk7s8ak5IhC4slzwigaQWR2Sw==
X-Received: by 10.84.240.1 with SMTP id y1mr3508830plk.391.1510880019831; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 16:53:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from DESKTOPFLHJVQJ ([2001:67c:1232:144:6d1f:df87:592f:459b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h29sm6002982pfd.65.2017.11.16.16.53.37 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 16 Nov 2017 16:53:38 -0800 (PST)
From: "Mehmet Ersue" <mersue@gmail.com>
To: "'Lou Berger'" <lberger@labn.net>, "'Mahesh Jethanandani'" <mjethanandani@gmail.com>, "'Robert Wilton'" <rwilton@cisco.com>
Cc: <netmod@ietf.org>
References: <20171115.101454.1576716701146734257.mbj@tail-f.com> <bb0f2cf8-ca46-21af-02cd-79970a08db7e@cisco.com> <0696749C-0E80-40CC-9905-BD8187CB6D78@gmail.com> <014a01d35e87$98797950$c96c6bf0$@gmail.com> <00143927-dc4d-5db8-e3ce-dbd56366a06c@labn.net>
In-Reply-To: <00143927-dc4d-5db8-e3ce-dbd56366a06c@labn.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 08:53:38 +0800
Message-ID: <009a01d35f3e$8330c960$89925c20$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Content-Language: de
Thread-Index: AQGxefq6yqyvOLF6jhxyeqpBlh8GFwHgxCcMAmPZNysCzQvFewIu7OMMoxGESOA=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/rFU2wBa0etJb9tLZb6BmhJXsBTs>
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: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:53:43 -0000

Sounds perfect to me.

Mehmet

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lou Berger [mailto:lberger@labn.net]
> Sent: Friday, November 17, 2017 7:43 AM
> To: Mehmet Ersue <mersue@gmail.com>; 'Mahesh Jethanandani'
> <mjethanandani@gmail.com>; 'Robert Wilton' <rwilton@cisco.com>
> Cc: netmod@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [netmod] tree diagram guidelines
> 
> 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
> >