[Tools-discuss] BOF to WG link when WG not named the same
Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 22 February 2017 16:51 UTC
Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5013012998D; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:51:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 32XhZsBpqVh5; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:51:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 329D312940A; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:51:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44573E1D3; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 12:13:49 -0500 (EST)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49D6C636BB; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:51:55 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: iesg@ietf.org, tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Attribution: mcr
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:51:55 -0500
Message-ID: <8184.1487782315@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/o0QZw80eTxaruWq1FpqvHPdF9HQ>
Subject: [Tools-discuss] BOF to WG link when WG not named the same
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:51:57 -0000
I think that this BOF: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/hoakey/about/ led to creation of this WG: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/hokey/about/ but, I can't find anything in either to confirm this! I'm sure the IESG telechat minutes would have made that obvious, but I'd have to search through a lot to confirm that... Further, https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/concluded/ due to it's length, does not clearly say that hoakey was a BOF. Yes, it was in that BOF part of the page, which is now many screen fulls... hokey was a group. Specifically the box for the BOF says: "security area", which led me (on a ^F search) to conclude the very short list, must be incomplete. Only after did I know to omit the 'a' (getting hokey) did it all become obvious. Could the "BOF" list boxes say, "Security Area BOFs", since the outer "BOF" box has long since scrolled off my screen? Could there be more of a link From the BOF name to an eventual WG? Or from the BOF page? Maybe it is enough for some text to go into the Charter area for a BOF which is given a different named WG, to just say that? (In the end, it was RFC 5295 that we were looking to reference, which we found) -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
- [Tools-discuss] BOF to WG link when WG not named … Michael Richardson