IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Thu, 31 March 2022 13:11 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: tao-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tao-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16A243A0477 for <tao-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 06:11:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.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 WyZXz0R1jcbE for <tao-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 06:11:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (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 C93C33A07A3 for <tao-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 06:11:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050096.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with ESMTP id 22VAc3m9007249; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 14:11:06 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=GHQSDSZBGyPcBdZ6KL/bzZZC4GCNBXnqOJ1blqEfa00=; b=FcDAKZO4jknyVaK5tFLcRroC4YIgoUfocIQoF0tRlTypTBMUc+0v9MSVY22i8PSbXMQX UZWcETKVJGZXRhYRoTZmJL7ZVRiwlIAl7Ke/+GKT65Dson0E5jcK+RvI3QaSbjhTe6Gn r++BGi+6Sm7bApBOpxPMd0XFtOoF9DRFLx1l9H9YPypjpf4+WqSiK7S7UApDVXLex8o0 GAHVjDUOJXeUdagz82gmftZ5FSOze6UdCz7g03ctcksGdUtMV0mzhBPPj/+ntGZjy1dI +i3gtUkT9pqo36NfMEQ+O09Ynuz1mxP+GnjlBZMALUbtXJ07BCHKdu/2EEI4bNZVG+p+ jQ==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint2 (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [184.51.33.19] (may be forged)) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3f1v4gbcn1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 31 Mar 2022 14:11:05 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 22VD852r016788; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 09:11:05 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.91.21]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com with ESMTP id 3f1x5y8u7k-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 31 Mar 2022 09:11:05 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag4mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.91.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.2.986.5; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 09:11:04 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.32; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 09:11:04 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.033; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 09:11:04 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, "tao-discuss@ietf.org" <tao-discuss@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [rfc-i] Tao [3rd party SDO cross-referencing of IETF work (was: Re: Chair/datatracker tracking expired WG documents ?)]
Thread-Index: AQHYQ9FoaHIgrGRn6kqOhY5o7Em3AKzXXw8AgACccICAAEf+gP//vrCAgABHmAD//8EeAIAApBiAgADK6gA=
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2022 13:11:03 +0000
Message-ID: <38C43BFB-D5FB-4BF8-AD8C-3949BEA7C469@akamai.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> <5abeddcf-1209-1dd1-a9c3-221ad1b78d98@gmail.com> <2fd7c18f-f4e2-374c-b852-8b12fef0f033@joelhalpern.com> <E0F6BFF3-CB79-4721-A69A-5847DAC6CBC3@akamai.com> <e957bd2c-4d90-a32b-8825-39c1d015dbba@joelhalpern.com> <E5A01BD0-98FA-46C1-B03A-A6356BFA4654@akamai.com> <495c56ba-e4e1-2044-5424-823efc49195d@joelhalpern.com> <F03C49EC-6BEE-4718-A3EF-68DE8DA756D5@akamai.com> <49a48870-dd01-5e59-c39d-a980aca5cb12@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <49a48870-dd01-5e59-c39d-a980aca5cb12@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.59.22031300
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.27.118.139]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <954C8EE6272F754C89E85881551028E5@akamai.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.425, 18.0.850 definitions=2022-03-31_04:2022-03-30, 2022-03-31 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2202240000 definitions=main-2203310073
X-Proofpoint-GUID: 5Zb7OT_VQTpnaKEhKrPeCBveqlZMGPeD
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 5Zb7OT_VQTpnaKEhKrPeCBveqlZMGPeD
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.850,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.64.514 definitions=2022-03-31_05,2022-03-31_01,2022-02-23_01
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 clxscore=1011 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2202240000 definitions=main-2203310073
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tao-discuss/RuJl_zMCUQF1D5jaYl9AxyRAOfI>
Subject: Re: [tao-discuss] [rfc-i] Tao [3rd party SDO cross-referencing of IETF work (was: Re: Chair/datatracker tracking expired WG documents ?)]
X-BeenThere: tao-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of the Tao of the IETF <tao-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tao-discuss>, <mailto:tao-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tao-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tao-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tao-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tao-discuss>, <mailto:tao-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2022 13:11:40 -0000

Wgchairs and rfc-interest to bcc; please use tao-discuss.

On 3/30/22, 5:05 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

>    And that's fine. All I'm saying is that for what looks like a fairly large
    update of something we suggest that all newcomers read, a community review
    is normal IETF practice.

Is that really the case?  We generally don't get community feedback on
	- all other www.ietf.org content
	- sponsorship logo's
	- newcomer's slides
	- newcomer's emails that go out
Have we ever?  Those things are just as likely to be seen by newcomers, arguably more so. Seems to me that the Tao is an outliner, and a 6722-bis saying that it should be treated like all other www.ietf.org content is worth doing.

>    As for the diffs, this is actually quite hard as a direct result of moving
    the Tao from RFC to web-content format. Is the current posted version
    available in Markdown somewhere?

I don't know; I just wrote the editors and asked where I could suggest changes. But maybe some on tao-discuss does. If you pull down the git repo and use the commandline, commit dae5894fb8b5bcc848fe0c3493bd732c8bd9a033 seems to be the last one before I started making suggestions (er, pull requests [PRs]).  I did mine a section at a time, and almost always stayed within the section, so looking for my commits might be good enough.

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status