Re: [rfc-i] [Rswg] draft-mcquistin-augmented-ascii-diagrams

Agree with Michael that this should be in the IETF stream if possible.
Seems very cool.

On Fri, Oct 27, 2023, 9:21 AM Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
wrote:

>
> Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear) <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org>
> wrote:
>     > draft-mcquistin-augmented-ascii-diagrams has been submitted for
> consideration
>     > as an independent submission.  I would like to know if this
> community has
>     > comments about this draft.  Would you find it of value?  Does it
> pose any
>     > concerns?  Is it well written?
>
> It is of value!!
>
> I think that it's wrong to do this as an independant submission.
> I think that it belongs in the RSWG :-)
> (Or maybe in the IETF stream in GEN Area somewhere)
> If we are going to do this, then we need to do it with some authority.
>
> Aren't there ways/tools to create the diagrams from text descriptions?
> (Like the mermaid diagrams)
>
> Decades ago I worked on
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nossik-pax-pdl/
> and I think that we actually wrote some code to generate the packet
> diagrams.
> I remember that we argued about many minutia about how do display certain
> things.
>
> The document itself I found wandered a bit, and I thought I'd get more of a
> criticism of the variations and why they are a problem, and why their
> format
> is better.  Instead it seemed to deep dive into very specifics that I was
> not
> quite ready for.
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
>            Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
> https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>