Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed
Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Thu, 11 November 2021 17:49 UTC
Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 890F03A0DD5 for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:49:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 Zvcy-lI9Irkr for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:49:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mta7.iomartmail.com (mta7.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.157]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C9033A0DD3 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:49:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vs4.iomartmail.com (vs4.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.122]) by mta7.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 1ABHnV4J005600; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 17:49:31 GMT
Received: from vs4.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FAF44607D; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 17:49:31 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from vs4.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B933C4604B; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 17:49:26 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.248]) by vs4.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 17:49:26 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ([84.93.2.119]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 1ABHnPSp000457 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 11 Nov 2021 17:49:26 GMT
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'Michael StJohns' <msj@nthpermutation.com>, rfced-future@iab.org
References: <79d32c80-dd1d-daf4-ae8e-5064a7d41dba@nthpermutation.com>
In-Reply-To: <79d32c80-dd1d-daf4-ae8e-5064a7d41dba@nthpermutation.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 17:49:25 -0000
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <023601d7d724$7853a0a0$68fae1e0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQHABcZrgTc0EiCYFjcftdW1orzBcqwuOszg
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Originating-IP: 84.93.2.119
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.1.0.2034-8.6.0.1018-26524.001
X-TM-AS-Result: No--8.164-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--8.164-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.1.0.2034-8.6.1018-26524.001
X-TMASE-Result: 10--8.164400-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: pS5owHKhBO3xIbpQ8BhdbI61Z+HJnvsOfePYk/N+W1grhioeAJKilYn8 w9PbaSGJIY8W3qOTcDSc6uj67xOkhhS4d2mjGHUJmOFnGEL0JOOL5MCc+du22H0mu4EXeD9Gac2 t/JoXOgD6CTrJ/RQ8aJ09pgURDiYVaaGs6XTeoZ+KR0fcRBoRNVIOc8QjxyVtEcWQUCNHW2ehAq HLqD5Ggc1BWrshJK3bXr6ShcUgPsNId3l8L6FwhPRUId35VCIeT5ysQDj6eFkCcQw/2siUZkKPQ Fc/fMN/1sS0B7F6uXIfQuFo5cgFFETKfKq8HqzdlVHM/F6YkvRM8zV+hbhmA8gV4AkwsqFnZ4Ys L3LbKzHkerFxK/XuuOSRbkfplPI4qcMNUvd1PQ8dxBAG5/hkW2P/IYHnyZ+wsLigDA/FpvXviD4 z8ehmeCcU9vuTnCWKxPnYyB4MOYYznw+i+raCo02Skm4RdDKBqb3/o5s+OcOJYx97rJn/3LiPFg CtDYg7jUKHuZS3Ko+nAbRNzr+DzYcL1fgO7YvztT4jIeGRd/WuP3jhainBquWR07sSEnVAV9dz6 47+et9ThZMUdrRJHGE/8apJ22BKnylG/Y6nzPTVr2dC6ax+aggnaupNy5h2OL/91ndgjbnNN8Ev tNwXeOjRyartA4oIRa0NB1EbxNYf0Lk5wIzieuT02pOa52nUwrBekK2Lf7RojAWuSDNe9jHzsSN v6H/4wyEPlTvajOdfGh9gMHDG0ad6neov7x7QJaPnAqeySUpy5Mi8Nd3XCkTqq9Xa45y59hzzbH h82h50905ctlpYH4FaJRII0UbsA4Ne3EO9MGKeAiCmPx4NwCs3zPQeiEbe+gtHj7OwNO3Ix3Icp 6zuW2mqdZZ2uPWtffILC5K/pOwdFoZ9yvYkpp8bPlXS3E5I
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/UmA3djW4G7wEqeLAJpnlIQu-9Ls>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed
X-BeenThere: rfced-future@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Editor Future Development Program <rfced-future.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfced-future/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfced-future@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 17:49:40 -0000
Thanks Mike, I find these to useful foundations. On the whole I might take them as well-known, but I think that future-proofing the discussions by setting out this text is helpful. It will, of course, disturb Brian and Eliot if we have to spend time on this discussion now, but it seems to me that if we don't have agreement on these points (the major points, not the wordsmithing) then we have an elephant in the room with us. Failing to address that elephant now would be gross neglect. Since I agree with this text, I find it hard to understand which points someone might disagree with. It would be helpful that if someone is made uncomfortable by this text, they could at least flag the high level what their concerns are so I can see the scale of the disagreement. I do understand that some might say, "There is no need to include this material," but this comes back to my first point, and putting in writing something you don't consider necessary is not immediately harmful. Cheers, Adrian -----Original Message----- From: Rfced-future <rfced-future-bounces@iab.org> On Behalf Of Michael StJohns Sent: 11 November 2021 17:21 To: rfced-future@iab.org Subject: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed I apologize for the delay in providing the following. This is the aftermath of Stephen's question/comment about heritage and it morphed into a document that attempts to describe current RFC series principles. I've passed this by 1/2dz or so folk and this incorporates their comments. # Principles for the RFC Editor Series The following principles provide some guidance as to the scope of documents that the RSWG may propose and the RSAB may approve. Documents or proposals which suggest modifications of any of the principles shall require additional approvals past that of the RSWG/RSAB, specifically consent from the IAB, IESG and the LLC and such approvals shall be granted only after gaining strong community consensus for such a change. ## Availability The RFC series documents have been freely available digitally for more than 35 years. No change shall be made to the model which would introduce fees for access to any or all of the RFC series documents. Distribution of RFCs shall continue to be subject to the Trust license<<REF: https://trustee.ietf.org/documents/trust-legal-provisions/>>. ## Accessibility There is a general goal to make the RFC series documents as accessible as possible to communities that have special needs - e.g. seeing impaired. Proposals that might negatively impact accessibility shall require the approvals of the IESG, IAB and LLC in addition to that of the RSAB. ## Publication Language The publication language of the series is, and shall remain, English. No action shall be taken which will prohibit the publication of translations of the RFC series in other languages, but the normative content language of an RFC shall remain English. ## Commonality of Purpose The RFC series is the general publication system for information related to the Internet, networking technology, and community discussions on those topics. Neither an expansion nor contraction of that scope is desired. ## Diversity of Interests The RFC series has published thought experiments, speculative ideas, research papers, histories, humor [RFC1149, RFC2549], and even eulogies [RFC2468]. And, more recently, Internet standards. Each of these RFCs and their communities have contributed to the rich history of the RFC series, and to its somewhat human-centric take on networking. If we did not acknowledge this and attempt to conserve the means of such expression we would probably be poorer for it. As the Independent Stream and IRTF Stream are the primary places that non-standards related conversations take place, and with a desire to maintain diversity of interests in the system, neither of these streams may be disestablished except by the approval of the IESG, IAB, LLC Board, and with strong community consensus. The RFC brand shall not be reserved at any time now or in the future solely to apply to a single community of interest i.e., IETF publications. ## Breadth of Expression While the RFC series has its own brand and style, the series is expected to account for individual expression where possible. ## Archival Quality Paraphrasing from the introduction to [RFC8153]: The RFC Editor System provides both publication and archival services for the RFC Series, although there is nothing prohibiting those roles being split apart. In the archival role the main goal is to preserve both the information described and the documents themselves for the indefinite future. To meet both publication and archival needs, the RFC Editor System must find the necessary balance between the publication needs of today and the archival needs of tomorrow, while acknowledging a finite set of resources to complete both aspects of the RFC Editor System functions. As there may be legal implications related to changes in archive policy, changes in the applicability of RFC8153 to the RFC Series, and/or changes to RFC8153 shall require the approvals of the IAB, IESG and LLC in addition to RSAB approval. ## World-class Publication As a world-class publication, quality, readability and accuracy are key to the success of the RFC Series. The publication process is designed in part to enhance those characteristics. Unfortunately, those ideals are sometimes at odds with a desire for an increase in speed of publication. Any RSWG proposals that promote speed at the expense of quality, readability or accuracy shall require the approvals of the IESG, IAB and LLC in addition to that of the RSAB. -- Rfced-future mailing list Rfced-future@iab.org https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future
- [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Michael StJohns
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Brian Rosen
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Salz, Rich
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Tommy Pauly
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Bob Hinden
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Scott Bradner
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Salz, Rich
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Tommy Pauly
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Jay Daley
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Christian Huitema
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed John Levine
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Tommy Pauly
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Christian Huitema
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Michael StJohns
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Christian Huitema
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Tommy Pauly
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Jay Daley
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Jay Daley
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Principles - long delayed John C Klensin