Re: [rfc-i] Archival format to rfc-interest and the IAB

Sarah Banks <sbanks@encrypted.net> Wed, 19 February 2020 23:58 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FA54120802 for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 15:58:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.951
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.951 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 WiYEq45sXUA7 for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 15:58:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C4D2120144 for <rfc-interest-archive-SieQuei0be@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 15:58:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D539BF40713; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 15:58:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D059EF40713 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 15:58:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K-8gkyePx0IH for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 15:58:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aws.hosed.org (aws.hosed.org [50.16.104.137]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 142A1F40710 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 15:58:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aws.hosed.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6919E0426; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 18:58:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from aws.hosed.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (aws.hosed.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Dy6BYjhhJFLd; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 18:58:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [10.76.5.193] (mobile-166-170-42-150.mycingular.net [166.170.42.150]) by aws.hosed.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 82CAAE0404; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 18:58:13 -0500 (EST)
From: Sarah Banks <sbanks@encrypted.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 15:58:11 -0800
Message-Id: <52BA75DF-6D58-4BF1-953F-1911F301DB20@encrypted.net>
References: <57ce444e-4ee9-26c5-9e76-ae6906e69159@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <57ce444e-4ee9-26c5-9e76-ae6906e69159@gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17D50)
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Archival format to rfc-interest and the IAB
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: RSOC <rsoc@iab.org>, RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>, Internet Architecture Board <iab@iab.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-interest" <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Hi Brian,
   It’s coming from the RSOC because we do not currently have an RSE. We currently do not have an acting RSE. We have a person in situ doing his finest to hold down tactical items while the community figures out the RSE business. Because this item felt like it couldn’t be simply shelved until there is an RSE the RSOC, including the temp PM, decided to share this note in the spirit of transparency. It’s not a new discussion in the RSOC, simply a byproduct of the desire to share info. 

Thanks
Sarah

> On Feb 13, 2020, at 12:14 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Sarah,
> 
> This is not about the technical aspect of your message.
> 
> Can you clarify why this is RSOC business? I don't understand where it fits in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6635#section-3.1. I would have expected any proposals to come from the (acting) RSE.
> 
> Regards
>   Brian Carpenter
> 
>> On 14-Feb-20 08:10, Sarah Banks wrote:
>> Hello IAB and RFC-interest community,
>> 
>>    The RSOC has been following discussion of the issues encountered in deploying the v3 RFC format. These issues have necessitated several changes to the format as bugs and ambiguities are found. While we believe that this is necessary, we have a concern that the incremental nature of these changes will result in will result in RFCs published in more than one XML format over time, as the adjustments are made.
>> 
>>    The Temporary RFC Series Project Manager is currently investigating how many of the already-executed as well as anticipated changes might result in backwards-incompatible changes to the format, to get a better sense of scale. 
>> 
>>    It could be that having multiple such formats in the corpus of RFCs will be an acceptable outcome; or, a decision could be made to re-publish the affected "interim format" RFCs in the final v3 format. We don't believe it's necessary to make that decision now, but we're sharing this information with the broader community for discussion.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Sarah
>> For the RSOC
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> rfc-interest mailing list
>> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>> 

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest