From braden at ISI.EDU Mon Feb 5 09:17:20 2007 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 09:17:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [rfc-i] Testing Message-ID: <200702051717.JAA03122@gra.isi.edu> Testing, please ignore. From braden at ISI.EDU Mon Feb 12 11:05:07 2007 From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 11:05:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [rfc-i] Another test... please ignore Message-ID: <200702121905.LAA04854@gra.isi.edu> From touch at ISI.EDU Mon Feb 12 14:54:37 2007 From: touch at ISI.EDU (Joe Touch) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:54:37 -0800 Subject: [rfc-i] updated Word template and tools In-Reply-To: <442C83AF.3020107@isi.edu> References: <442C83AF.3020107@isi.edu> Message-ID: <45D0F02D.6050309@isi.edu> Hi, all, A new version of my Word template is now available; it includes: - moved boilerplate to regular text to make it easier for authors to track the evolution of BCP 78 - added Intended status: header item - added acknowledgement of use of this template updated ID: http://www.isi.edu/touch/pubs/draft-touch-msword-template-v2.0-05.txt updated template: http://www.isi.edu/touch/tools/2-Word-v2.0.template.dot (this is always the most up-to-date one, if you just want to link it in) perl post-processor: http://www.isi.edu/touch/tools/2-Word-post-v2.0.pl (same thing - always updated) Feedback would be appreciated. This version appears to be final, and will likely be submitted for publication as an RFC. Comments welcome. Joe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 250 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature Url : http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20070212/03b0ca9d/signature.bin From touch at ISI.EDU Tue Feb 13 07:26:54 2007 From: touch at ISI.EDU (Joe Touch) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 07:26:54 -0800 Subject: [rfc-i] [Tools-discuss] updated Word template and tools In-Reply-To: <45D1B2D9.30506@zurich.ibm.com> References: <442C83AF.3020107@isi.edu> <45D0F02D.6050309@isi.edu> <45D1B2D9.30506@zurich.ibm.com> Message-ID: <45D1D8BE.4050608@isi.edu> Although the template can continue to be updated to track boilerplate, the description of what the template is and how it was designed should be as stable as many other RFCs. I.e., to the extent that the BCP78 docs are RFCs, this should as well. If we did have a series solely for RFC administration purposes, then both should be moved there. In summary, I intend to submit this for publication as an Informational RFC. That is the meaning behind "final". Joe Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Joe, > > Thanks for this. > > I'm not sure anything like this is ever truly 'final' though. > It seems like the sort of updatable materal that IONs are aimed > at. > > Brian > > On 2007-02-12 23:54, Joe Touch wrote: >> Hi, all, >> >> A new version of my Word template is now available; it includes: >> >> - moved boilerplate to regular text to make it easier >> for authors to track the evolution of BCP 78 >> - added Intended status: header item >> - added acknowledgement of use of this template >> >> updated ID: >> http://www.isi.edu/touch/pubs/draft-touch-msword-template-v2.0-05.txt >> >> updated template: >> http://www.isi.edu/touch/tools/2-Word-v2.0.template.dot >> (this is always the most up-to-date one, if you just want to link it in) >> >> perl post-processor: >> http://www.isi.edu/touch/tools/2-Word-post-v2.0.pl >> (same thing - always updated) >> >> Feedback would be appreciated. This version appears to be final, and >> will likely be submitted for publication as an RFC. Comments welcome. >> >> Joe >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tools-discuss mailing list >> Tools-discuss at ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss -- ---------------------------------------- Joe Touch Sr. Network Engineer, USAF TSAT Space Segment -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 250 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature Url : http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20070213/8db4d11f/signature.bin From touch at ISI.EDU Tue Feb 13 09:07:49 2007 From: touch at ISI.EDU (Joe Touch) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:07:49 -0800 Subject: [rfc-i] [Tools-discuss] updated Word template and tools In-Reply-To: <45D1E05A.3020305@zurich.ibm.com> References: <442C83AF.3020107@isi.edu> <45D0F02D.6050309@isi.edu> <45D1B2D9.30506@zurich.ibm.com> <45D1D8BE.4050608@isi.edu> <45D1E05A.3020305@zurich.ibm.com> Message-ID: <45D1F065.70501@isi.edu> Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Joe, > > I don't see the analogy with any BCPs - they are rules, whereas > xml2rfc, your template, and the various nroff templates still around > are just tools - very useful tools - but are they archival material? The tools no. The RFCs describing the tools - presumably in a non-versionspecific way - yes. > I would ask the same question of RFC2629 if it came up today; in fact > it's out of date, which sort of proves my point. I'm sure there are other > RFCs that are also in this class. That's why we invented IONs, in fact. Who's "we", and where are IONs? Joe > > Brian > > On 2007-02-13 16:26, Joe Touch wrote: >> Although the template can continue to be updated to track boilerplate, >> the description of what the template is and how it was designed should >> be as stable as many other RFCs. >> >> I.e., to the extent that the BCP78 docs are RFCs, this should as well. >> If we did have a series solely for RFC administration purposes, then >> both should be moved there. >> >> In summary, I intend to submit this for publication as an Informational >> RFC. That is the meaning behind "final". >> >> Joe >> >> Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>> Joe, >>> >>> Thanks for this. >>> >>> I'm not sure anything like this is ever truly 'final' though. >>> It seems like the sort of updatable materal that IONs are aimed >>> at. >>> >>> Brian >>> >>> On 2007-02-12 23:54, Joe Touch wrote: >>>> Hi, all, >>>> >>>> A new version of my Word template is now available; it includes: >>>> >>>> - moved boilerplate to regular text to make it easier >>>> for authors to track the evolution of BCP 78 >>>> - added Intended status: header item >>>> - added acknowledgement of use of this template >>>> >>>> updated ID: >>>> http://www.isi.edu/touch/pubs/draft-touch-msword-template-v2.0-05.txt >>>> >>>> updated template: >>>> http://www.isi.edu/touch/tools/2-Word-v2.0.template.dot >>>> (this is always the most up-to-date one, if you just want to link it >>>> in) >>>> >>>> perl post-processor: >>>> http://www.isi.edu/touch/tools/2-Word-post-v2.0.pl >>>> (same thing - always updated) >>>> >>>> Feedback would be appreciated. This version appears to be final, and >>>> will likely be submitted for publication as an RFC. Comments welcome. >>>> >>>> Joe >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Tools-discuss mailing list >>>> Tools-discuss at ietf.org >>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tools-discuss mailing list >> Tools-discuss at ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 250 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature Url : http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20070213/0c42bf7d/signature.bin From touch at ISI.EDU Wed Feb 14 06:35:39 2007 From: touch at ISI.EDU (Joe Touch) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 06:35:39 -0800 Subject: [rfc-i] [Tools-discuss] updated Word template and tools In-Reply-To: <45D2C588.8050104@zurich.ibm.com> References: <442C83AF.3020107@isi.edu> <45D0F02D.6050309@isi.edu> <45D1B2D9.30506@zurich.ibm.com> <45D1D8BE.4050608@isi.edu> <45D1E05A.3020305@zurich.ibm.com> <45D1F065.70501@isi.edu> <45D2C588.8050104@zurich.ibm.com> Message-ID: <45D31E3B.8000804@isi.edu> Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 2007-02-13 18:07, Joe Touch wrote: >> >> Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>> Joe, >>> >>> I don't see the analogy with any BCPs - they are rules, whereas >>> xml2rfc, your template, and the various nroff templates still around >>> are just tools - very useful tools - but are they archival material? >> >> The tools no. The RFCs describing the tools - presumably in a >> non-versionspecific way - yes. >> >>> I would ask the same question of RFC2629 if it came up today; in fact >>> it's out of date, which sort of proves my point. I'm sure there are >>> other >>> RFCs that are also in this class. That's why we invented IONs, in fact. >> >> Who's "we", and where are IONs? > > "We" is presumably the IETF community, since RFC 4693 was approved > after a last call debate. The main culprits were Harald Alvestrand, > Cullen Jennings and myself. > > http://www.ietf.org/IESG/content/ions.html That was agreed to as an experiment. There doesn't appear to be a process in place for these as yet. I'll consider participating in that track after BCP 78 is in that series; that will convince me it exists and that it's ready for use. Joe >>> Brian >>> >>> On 2007-02-13 16:26, Joe Touch wrote: >>>> Although the template can continue to be updated to track boilerplate, >>>> the description of what the template is and how it was designed should >>>> be as stable as many other RFCs. >>>> >>>> I.e., to the extent that the BCP78 docs are RFCs, this should as well. >>>> If we did have a series solely for RFC administration purposes, then >>>> both should be moved there. >>>> >>>> In summary, I intend to submit this for publication as an Informational >>>> RFC. That is the meaning behind "final". >>>> >>>> Joe >>>> >>>> Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>>>> Joe, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for this. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure anything like this is ever truly 'final' though. >>>>> It seems like the sort of updatable materal that IONs are aimed >>>>> at. >>>>> >>>>> Brian >>>>> >>>>> On 2007-02-12 23:54, Joe Touch wrote: >>>>>> Hi, all, >>>>>> >>>>>> A new version of my Word template is now available; it includes: >>>>>> >>>>>> - moved boilerplate to regular text to make it easier >>>>>> for authors to track the evolution of BCP 78 >>>>>> - added Intended status: header item >>>>>> - added acknowledgement of use of this template >>>>>> >>>>>> updated ID: >>>>>> http://www.isi.edu/touch/pubs/draft-touch-msword-template-v2.0-05.txt >>>>>> >>>>>> updated template: >>>>>> http://www.isi.edu/touch/tools/2-Word-v2.0.template.dot >>>>>> (this is always the most up-to-date one, if you just want to link it >>>>>> in) >>>>>> >>>>>> perl post-processor: >>>>>> http://www.isi.edu/touch/tools/2-Word-post-v2.0.pl >>>>>> (same thing - always updated) >>>>>> >>>>>> Feedback would be appreciated. This version appears to be final, and >>>>>> will likely be submitted for publication as an RFC. Comments welcome. >>>>>> >>>>>> Joe >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Tools-discuss mailing list >>>>>> Tools-discuss at ietf.org >>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Tools-discuss mailing list >>>> Tools-discuss at ietf.org >>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss >> -- ---------------------------------------- Joe Touch Sr. Network Engineer, USAF TSAT Space Segment -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 250 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature Url : http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20070214/f5c19a31/signature.bin From touch at ISI.EDU Wed Feb 14 08:04:59 2007 From: touch at ISI.EDU (Joe Touch) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 08:04:59 -0800 Subject: [rfc-i] [Tools-discuss] updated Word template and tools In-Reply-To: <45D32D51.4020809@zurich.ibm.com> References: <442C83AF.3020107@isi.edu> <45D0F02D.6050309@isi.edu> <45D1B2D9.30506@zurich.ibm.com> <45D1D8BE.4050608@isi.edu> <45D1E05A.3020305@zurich.ibm.com> <45D1F065.70501@isi.edu> <45D2C588.8050104@zurich.ibm.com> <45D31E3B.8000804@isi.edu> <45D32D51.4020809@zurich.ibm.com> Message-ID: <45D3332B.4070809@isi.edu> Brian E Carpenter wrote: ... >>> http://www.ietf.org/IESG/content/ions.html >> >> That was agreed to as an experiment. There doesn't appear to be a >> process in place for these as yet. > > Well, we have three approved ones so far, and two more just exited > public comment. The RFC-Editor page has no reference to them. The IETF pages have no clear indication of them. Your roadmap doc from Aug 06 has no reference to them. RFC4228 has no indication of how to submit them. They're buried under the IESG directory now. And this is not an IESG process doc. While this is an interesting experiment, and might be useful for minutes and the like, I don't agree that it is ready for other documents at this point. >> I'll consider participating in that track after BCP 78 is in that >> series; that will convince me it exists and that it's ready for use. > > Joe, by definition, a BCP will *never* be an ION. IONs are not for > rules; they are only for operational procedures. See Section 3 of the RFC; it specifically calls for moving BCP 78 into an ION. I appreciate that this may result in its losing the "BCP" title, but I thought the idea above was otherwise clear. Joe -- ---------------------------------------- Joe Touch Sr. Network Engineer, USAF TSAT Space Segment -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 250 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature Url : http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20070214/b2a70c75/signature.bin