SUMMARY: Processing of expired Internet-Drafts

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Just to make one thing clear....

The published processing of expired Internet-Drafts was intended to be a reasonably small change to existing procedures.

That's not to say that the procedures are going to live forever. But we don't want to make bigger changes than we have to until we're ready to overhaul the whole system (and know why).

Anyway, back to the summary..... I've tried to represent what people said, and group them into a few topics. Conclusions (mine) at the end.

* Use of tombstone files.
Current procedure is to create tombstone files whenever an I-D is no longer valid (withdrawn, expired, published as RFC).
Arguments raised are that a file of "old names" is better (Fred, Ted, Eric F) or a separate directory (Carl) or a search system (Alexey).


* Tombstones and expiry.
Current procedure is to make them live forever.
Arguments raised are that 700 IDs per year produce a lot of tombstones (Fred, Ken), and that we could expire them after 6 months (Zefram, Fred) or 2 years (David Morris).
My argument is that we've lived with the present system since 2001, and produced only around 2500 tombstones; it's not worth bothering to change that until we change the system more dramatically.


* Tombstones and version numbers:
Current procedure is to expire name-nn, create tombstone name-nn+1, and if it is resurrected, to resurrect as name-nn+1.
(Until some time ago, the tombstone was name-nn)
Arguments raised are that 2 files with the same name and different content is a Bad Thing, and that we should increment the number once again for a new version (Fred, Zefram, Jim Galvin), or use another extension for tombstones (David Morris).
One problem seen is searching for name+1 will now give a hit (Carl), and that maintaining mirrors is harder (Fred).
The problem of mirroring can be cleanly solved with rsync (Thomas), or comparing file sizes (someone else).


* Status of drafts:
Current procedure is to let the version-numbered files, including tombstones, serve as status information, as well as 1id-index listing the current drafts.
Argument is that a name without the version number would be more easy to find (Iljitch); this is easy to make when you need it (Scott Brim), and exists at www.watersprings.org (among other places (Tim Chown) and www.potaroo.net (Geoff)


Conclusions, all mine:

- Documenting current procedures is good.
- We won't expire tombstones. They're not a big enough problem yet.
- We'll think about naming tombstones something else than the exact draft name (for instance draft-whatever-version-nn-expired.txt???)
- We'll note the issue of referencing names without the version number as input for thinking about overhauling the whole I-D system. But that won't happen very quickly - it "mostly works".


Seems to make sense?

Harald




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]