Re: [Tools-discuss] Expiry Doctrine (Re: Expired draft on the w.g. status pages [was Re: disappearing IDs on])

S Moonesamy <> Mon, 14 September 2020 09:42 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC27F3A0D81 for <>; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 02:42:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.697
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.697 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)"
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZF5GZr2b3Oe5 for <>; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 02:42:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE0B33A0D73 for <>; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 02:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPSA id 08E9gLAo026128 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 14 Sep 2020 02:42:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail; t=1600076555; x=1600162955;; bh=f0cuxG4hHZfif5tJVmqmrdYYw2DKZBEJBLHEiEVOfsk=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=IlLTZXwsWZDezSoq6at/Gs65QLRUhQy7r5NK6Ioiwai6VxPnyk6CDSmWgtDrpSj6k wRV/n/1+lsIJloLAaezhALC7SCrUXJMWRB7zygN60mI8T3MerMn1F9tzykYJ7GN4L7 Td2+0BHa/fP4SoonGvkC/7bFoi4KHPmNff0oKjeE=
Message-Id: <>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 02:41:54 -0700
To: Carsten Bormann <>,
From: S Moonesamy <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <8657.1599751932@localhost> <> <> <> <7792.1599768579@localhost> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] Expiry Doctrine (Re: Expired draft on the w.g. status pages [was Re: disappearing IDs on])
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 09:42:56 -0000

Hi Carsten,
At 01:31 AM 12-09-2020, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>How do we represent the (desirable) aspects of 
>expiry without trying, unsuccessfully, to live the expiry doctrine?
>By making expiry (and replacement) a dynamic 
>*property* of a draft.  (Note that there is text 
>in each draft that describes the current value 
>of this property based on the current date — 
>this text is actually more likely untrue than 
>true, and this has caused all kinds of problems 
>with people taking the text at face 
>value.  Instead it should point to a resource 
>where the true current state can be ascertained.)

There was an IETF discussion about the expiration 
of I-Ds.  That led to a change where expired I-Ds 
were replaced with a "tombstone" file unless 
there is a newer version of the I-D.

>I cannot finish this note without noticing how 
>all this is not in the domain of the RFC editor 
>— we have kept the domain of authoring and progressing documents out of this


S. Moonesamy