Re: [saag] SSH & Ntruprime

[Michael StJohns <[e-mail]>]

On 3/25/2024 3:01 PM, Salz, Rich wrote:
>
> Has the IETF committed itself - through an actual public discussion - 
> of making the IDs archival? Keeping them online - yes.  Keeping them 
> at a fixed URL, I think not and I think RFC8447 was a mistake. 
> Referencing RFC8477 as precedent for Murray's question seems problematic.
>
> If you really want to know, perhaps ask tools-discuss email? Or search 
> the email archives.
>
> Someone sent me a pointer off-line. Thanks to that person, who wishes 
> to remain anonymous :) The IESG issued a statement in October 2012 [1] 
> after starting a discussion the month before [2].  The discussion was, 
> shall we say, “extensive.”
>
> [1] 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-iesg-statement-on-removal-of-an-internet-draft-from-the-ietf-web-site-20121025/
>
> [2] 
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Jea_pkJrsgI1dUWvaNdROPY5KCs/
>
Yup - I remember this.  However, this inapposite (yes, been reading too 
many court filings) to the question of "stable reference" which lies at 
the heart of the RFC 8126 requirement for "Specification Required".

> The intention behind "permanent and readily available" is that a
>     document can reasonably be expected to be findable and retrievable
>     long after IANA assignment of the requested value.  Publication of an
>     RFC is an ideal means of achieving this requirement, but
>     Specification Required is intended to also cover the case of a
>     document published outside of the RFC path, including informal
>     documentation.

The language of the statement at [2] does not provide for a stable 
reference, and allows for the removal of various IDs to a private 
archive under certain circumstances.  [2] DOES end the practice of 
removing expired drafts from the public archive and that was about it.  
It didn't say anything about keeping the public archive at a fixed 
location.  And, indeed, the public FTP archive of IDs is some what 
recently deceased.  There's a wide gulf between the meaning of  "Don't 
delete" and "Archive".

What's the proper cite for a stable ID?  The IANA apparently copies the 
current version over to their own files and references that in the 
registry, but the rest of us generally cite the datatracker page, or 
occasionally one of the archived .txt, .xml, .html or .pdf versions of 
the document as appropriate.  Or in the past, the tools page which was 
at times much more useful that then the datatracker.

I understand what 8447 wanted to accomplish, I just don't think it went 
about it the right way.  I don't think it should be a precedent for 
future documents without actually writing down the backing requirements 
and making sure they're institutionalized across the IETF organizations.

Later, Mike