IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Wed, 30 March 2022 00:59 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 9B4DC3A193D for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:59:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1648601989; bh=+YVtDg8MR4x6jQya2hxQrCRDHF92BJrVLOxVm83Xm9M=; h=To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: Cc; b=mX5foaFGEYxsJvEc2zFDXyCCim4u0jlWAwQNDvVCcDyN7lZlM5tOi1M1YO+qP3IMo /3TtRqwX4Mt4GIc1H0W3SEcGl+TWb7DK3yBjhRohUFORxoAxoQ6DKkQVLa8lsJuZET 5KOsh9kmpR1OC6pBn+lL04A6SSv5RjNTVq+8xm6M=
X-Mailbox-Line: From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Mar 29 17:59:40 2022
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A42F33A18FB; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:59:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1648601971; bh=+YVtDg8MR4x6jQya2hxQrCRDHF92BJrVLOxVm83Xm9M=; h=To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: Cc; b=tAG31CHjsUNqxxcEnqfzSvQF1kAOpZy0Ee5y1sOhsfVlsnUvB5oyUkeT0xLvgz9+n yakzi1EELuMCw+pByRXVU/pzzGSwF+8Kevv/dVZAfaZtiUdElxlcCpJg/gjOJJ/dDv aNeYyUsf7/HB2bssMjB2s+WiSjC7AeywaOAk3W2k=
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 9A0043A18E9 for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable 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 dUtxPzfX2zhF for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:59:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x102c.google.com (mail-pj1-x102c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102c]) (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 0E9C53A18EB for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:59:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x102c.google.com with SMTP id gb19so19121711pjb.1 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:59:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BZs+JaQl2MHm6004F2WuJfSTyNm1Hlk4osKrsL+yXNQ=; b=Czey94YEbOfVudexm6yv18Ehp2ETOaFBTlrEFdqPKi4l0w5IUDcxNUGCYqDERVJV4s eg4ZN4AS2KzkdSyf+tZts9QU+FkTT3uMfJ8o57hW99IlSzGi0KNi6aJXhcSPNLR5dPLw GujrO365kZ2UQRKyFB4BLXFnkTef1hQkBNkLLBsBBSSyKCQ4fjBiR9WLV5rkelBkKYvf +GtjEELLVVEPmeHKJBBrHszZqA6t/r8oHwRIV2VD+FT61E1Oqv8wb18heHTAv12VdebX RpSCZkKnMjiN8tGxFsO7YOfu502NgxKqhchB1ePG/QM+oNkkIW0f1JRDH2LhyoSczsMX iV0g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=BZs+JaQl2MHm6004F2WuJfSTyNm1Hlk4osKrsL+yXNQ=; b=1/g4H+UAGvPXPrS/QZHLO4yv3ZQc/mO+HtO8ql8MWh9C1wJdvAUAG3Bz1Nlxvn5mO4 BxbeZDQtBVyTa0oaPXgFTC2vNds2k/5X1nhQboJW489X5vRI0/oLMmtuqSPKiaOAbRkR ykmRMbSLkR1HbulGhLPG0hAP+Aik7WT1xKxzoefmb/JDQxjT35cIsrqzwf5xUOtnkMEZ wevOPrfyhb/XHowxbzExno1uY4M+81uHkU69aUl8yIRqeOY1MhJLTFYN+92nQ7BkASoZ XRh/S92vEgC0Nng8i27zD4zBfk57/ZRC5wDkqWUUu1q1Zaz4mUdCs9gbI4CjYxavrc2C 0ocw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Sfmv3Byg41rKg5KXdsFp0Gsa+99UtjaTWQa2IXB3l5DiTROjo oP4vISdzKXoAERJ8HbrlN28FUGZMX8bWLw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzaILYQ88msImMUWEYtBKNqPy7lrE3ER93/mjKcha3VIzc+WWSYbZ0bhZ1hOhB9D0W4NEmRhQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8497:b0:154:9282:bc01 with SMTP id c23-20020a170902849700b001549282bc01mr33284932plo.33.1648601964626; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:59:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:1005:b501:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:1005:b501:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bx23-20020a056a00429700b004fa79b2cb31sm19099299pfb.51.2022.03.29.17.59.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:59:23 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>, "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A" <db3546@att.com>, "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, Joel Halpern Direct <jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com>
References: <Yj2d4DJMFWJOxoZa@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <317196df-3363-36c9-2421-02d9e229f664@joelhalpern.com> <CO1PR11MB488130CFF42A9F309AE1E212D81A9@CO1PR11MB4881.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <95b5dab0-3eb5-536d-85fc-d428f26364ed@joelhalpern.com> <CABcZeBOSMRffY6cXjwn7A6d=JWDJmmBrgHxiPD-XRMTMazOjLw@mail.gmail.com> <CO1PR11MB48812B0C5B88C190FB4A28ECD81D9@CO1PR11MB4881.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <7042bc99-5d14-993c-198b-1080b4ff5636@gmail.com> <CH0PR02MB8291A7A9598871412C035882D61E9@CH0PR02MB8291.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <39A3A9C9-5EED-4E44-9695-6186C5A3F7AC@akamai.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5abeddcf-1209-1dd1-a9c3-221ad1b78d98@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 13:59:17 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <39A3A9C9-5EED-4E44-9695-6186C5A3F7AC@akamai.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-interest/mnDo67JfjAxfzfSNesVmq37nFdw>
Subject: [rfc-i] Tao [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>, "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: "rfc-interest" <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Hi Rich,

I can't reduce this to a PR. It seems to me that the proposed new text for the Tao has lost some very important parts of the old text. It doesn't state that I-Ds expire after 6 months (which they still do, unless we amend RFC 2026), it doesn't underline that "They are most definitely not standards" and it doesn't state that they must only be cited as "work in progress". There's no need to quote BCP 9, but I think the points should be made.

Also, BTW, as well as mentioning the optional Privacy Considerations, why not mention the optional Implementation Status section (RFC7942 = BCP 205)?

Regards
    Brian

On 30-Mar-22 10:47, Salz, Rich wrote:
>>     These couple of sentences in the Tao are actually from RFC2026 and about the transient state of I-Ds.
> 
> In fact, the current version of the Tao (maintained at https://github.com/ietf/tao) doesn't have that language, but instead just points to BCP 9. Phrases like "work in progress" are also removed, pointing to BCP 9.
> 
> We only just finished editing/merging before IETF 113, and there wasn't time to update the website.  Please take a look at the GitHub repo and see if the language there needs to be fixed.
> 
> I think Valery's point got lost :(
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
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