Re: [Tools-discuss] "Distantly related Internet-Drafts"?

[Lucas Pardue <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, 1 Oct 2021, 07:25 Lars Eggert, <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 2021-10-1, at 1:59, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> > The first document filename starts with "draft-dawkins-quic". I expect
> this one to be listed as a related Internet-Draft. The filename is
> "draft-author-wgname-*", as suggested for Internet-Drafts in
> https://www.ietf.org/standards/ids/guidelines/#7, and it is related to
> the QUIC working group.
> >
> > The second and third document filenames start with
> "draft-dawkins-sdp-rtp-quic". I wasn't expecting to see these listed as
> related to the QUIC working group. These drafts are intended for discussion
> on the MOQ ("Media Over QUIC'') non-WG mailing list, and (if I understand
> the guidance I've gotten from the TSV and ART ADs correctly) are actually
> out of scope for the QUIC working group.
> >
> > Is it possible that the datatracker is scanning the filename looking for
> any occurrence of a working group name, not just in the third position?
>
> IIRC, when I was a QUIC co-chair, I manually tweaked the pattern for the
> QUIC WG in the datatracker settings, because people were submitting
> QUIC-related I-Ds that were not showing up on our datatracker page and we
> hence didn't learn about until (sometimes much) later.
>
> Since I'm not a co-chair anymore, I don't have access to the "manage
> document list" button anymore, so I can't verify this.
>

I've become accustomed to the behaviour now. To my mind out of scope for a
charter doesn't mean unrelated. I think the datatracker does a decent job
with tags that it can let us clearly mark drafts that are serious
contenders for adoption vs other more tangential things.

If there's a problem that the current pattern causes then we can have a
discussion but otherwise I'd leave it as is.


>