IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rfced-future] Model proposal

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Wed, 08 July 2020 00:40 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
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 D7ECF3A0CBC for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 17:40:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cryptonector.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 uR0MJcipxD6q for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 17:40:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from anteater.elm.relay.mailchannels.net (anteater.elm.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.212.3]) (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 9E5CF3A0CBE for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 17:40:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4938E7E0E75; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 00:40:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a38.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-23-13.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.23.13]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C86CC7E12C7; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 00:40:44 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a38.g.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.8); Wed, 08 Jul 2020 00:40:45 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Shrill-Attack: 39c17a6642df6ff9_1594168845123_2586910001
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1594168845122:2855299869
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1594168845122
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a38.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a38.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75355B4793; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 17:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=WFqnT6VDDn8J7z ctebirfl1VkBM=; b=xe2/LEgqPCGOMaxNjqN/BQCWmdd4cBja3Rgc1E7Kbk2rG+ augG06XMAOrP3OBniccAcxRNhboB4+Zhoeu7XBzBlfjIWX/snGnAIGSgm8IYG1Vs T31XsNPykmPtib5P1jhh9PDuzEeRyN1nmrNnUPOT0TtNh5X86+aO2W91jV4+k=
Received: from localhost (unknown [24.28.108.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a38.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 322FFB4794; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 17:40:42 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2020 19:40:38 -0500
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a38
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, rfced-future@iab.org, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
Message-ID: <20200708004037.GW3100@localhost>
References: <d4d1cd2d-6df2-4cb4-b63a-f9bba45b48c0@www.fastmail.com> <51b72823-f2a2-29bd-bd88-f63e13522387@gmail.com> <d1f33279-0656-4caa-81e7-aa665d3a4acb@www.fastmail.com> <CABcZeBMdrfjy+kqQ20MS_1fZrNddff+ycwau5VdC5qAFQN2qVA@mail.gmail.com> <20200707174930.GP3100@localhost> <CABcZeBMGxE6+29_BfNEANjZVJ=0UKFYM+pCp_ECsDw6e2aFMwQ@mail.gmail.com> <37d1d244-ae3f-26db-11c7-d4fcfd25a747@gmail.com> <20200707222803.GV3100@localhost> <5f0ca6a7-7c08-4d7f-0f16-d565632e261b@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5f0ca6a7-7c08-4d7f-0f16-d565632e261b@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK
X-VR-OUT-SCORE: -100
X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrudeigdefjecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfftffgtefojffquffvnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujggfsehttdertddtredvnecuhfhrohhmpefpihgtohcuhghilhhlihgrmhhsuceonhhitghosegtrhihphhtohhnvggtthhorhdrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepffdtkeethfeuteeviefgfeegjeetjedvhfehgfdvtdefueejheelgeeuhffghffgnecukfhppedvgedrvdekrddutdekrddukeefnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhppdhhvghloheplhhotggrlhhhohhsthdpihhnvghtpedvgedrvdekrddutdekrddukeefpdhrvghtuhhrnhdqphgrthhhpefpihgtohcuhghilhhlihgrmhhsuceonhhitghosegtrhihphhtohhnvggtthhorhdrtghomheqpdhmrghilhhfrhhomhepnhhitghosegtrhihphhtohhnvggtthhorhdrtghomhdpnhhrtghpthhtohepnhhitghosegtrhihphhtohhnvggtthhorhdrtghomh
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/a35MppK5mIGiz7SsMxcxkQIPwdQ>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] Model proposal
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: Wed, 08 Jul 2020 00:40:48 -0000

On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 10:55:14AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> All the same, I believe the actual evidence is that we (engineers)
> don't understand the editing/publishing/library/archival world at
> all well and we need help.

I think we understand the RFC publishing issues fairly well -- well
enough to deal with the RFC publication process.  It would be strange if
we didn't!  Now, maybe we need to move into the 21st century of
publishing, but maybe not, and at any rate, we should evolve our
publication process rather than revolutionize it.  I.e., to me it sounds
like much ado about not much, which isn't to say that we didn't have a
spectacular failure a year ago, but it wasn't a failure to understand
the world of publication.

Nico
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email