IETF Logo Mail Archive

[rfc-i] ****SPAM**** Re: Re: 3rd party SDO cross-referencing of IETF work (was: Re: Chair/datatracker tracking expired WG documents ?)

'Toerless Eckert' <tte@cs.fau.de> Fri, 25 March 2022 14:16 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 ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9FEA3A1394 for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 07:16:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1648217798; bh=xnn+vMTosVfgAk/CWsONWyAVhb/Qmyn7aF08ORYbJJE=; h=Date:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: Cc; b=Y9pPzWn6TBw2sD79cJrdUzxaY4VG/9Y/jY1qzvbIUtw7K+5AejrxAlTIH/NsqWDZi 8rvK7mJLqdSFje4+HVRA78NWvdvEq3BEOvIn28Vt1ZJlCD5Cjo7c+cwIHbnrIXfs9H tHIAoq2EOeNxynQR7b18v0igdUkXmKK3MQY4QQ4g=
X-Mailbox-Line: From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Mar 25 07:16:31 2022
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B1733A13EC; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 07:16:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1648217788; bh=xnn+vMTosVfgAk/CWsONWyAVhb/Qmyn7aF08ORYbJJE=; h=Date:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: Cc; b=EbpXREoHsptHKvAT0OwrZGy8AXaFrGRNLQHd1QkQvlXMsajnlBQ7pvDhx7YXltqw5 hdfLpcwm66DXqHo3w1ckAt5eb+vClH+u4u4wuTp+MzhqwYhdB5iiG8lV6Uqo0kVO6z Utfpaf90FWnj84xGM3zP8AX8lRmUbzigs9QCRl1g=
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA7EE3A11BF for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 07:16:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.883
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.883 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=no 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 btc0wmPGNYgK for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 07:16:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA8953A10EA for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 07:16:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) id C2B243BAA5; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 07:16:16 -0700 (PDT)
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C041915EE85 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 07:16:16 -0700 (PDT)
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 wy3qxpG7OgKo for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 07:16:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 694963BAA5 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 07:16:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:51]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B334058C4B0; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 15:16:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: by faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 056D54EAA06; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 15:16:09 +0100 (CET)
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 15:16:08 +0100
From: 'Toerless Eckert' <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
Message-ID: <Yj3OqD1UawX0GN03@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <Yj2d4DJMFWJOxoZa@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <317196df-3363-36c9-2421-02d9e229f664@joelhalpern.com> <Yj2wI/nc+gzbIBMF@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <9C68473E-4C39-4EFA-ACBF-7968676DDEB8@akamai.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <9C68473E-4C39-4EFA-ACBF-7968676DDEB8@akamai.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-interest/bHcJOZkM5vNzzPxDOuk6wuuTbVA>
Subject: [rfc-i] ****SPAM**** Re: Re: 3rd party SDO cross-referencing of IETF work (was: Re: Chair/datatracker tracking expired WG documents ?)
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://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: "wgchairs@ietf.org" <wgchairs@ietf.org>, "Pascal Thubert \(pthubert\)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-interest" <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:21:43PM +0000, Salz, Rich wrote:
> This could be useful information to know. Does the liaison program not handle it?
> 
> >   But of course, if an external SDO does choose to ignore our recommendation
>     and is actually referrring to a draft in a published spec, then i still would
>     rather like to know about it via such an explicit tracking mechanism than
>     not to know about it.
> 
> A potential problem is that, unless people (who, that's also a problem) are diligent about following up and discouraging such use, then it is very easy for the misbehaving SDO to say "but you never complained so we assumed it's okay."

True. I am hoping that if we tool this appropriately, then it will make life
easier for both sides (external SDO and us), and thats why its hopefully used.

Of course, appropriate tooling would mean that whereever you click for
"bibtex" (to this document) on datatracker, there would then have to be a better
option making it easy to register a referencing external SDO document
(at least that my starting bid ;-)

Cheers
    Toerless

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

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email