Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: <status-change-int-tlds-to-historic-00.txt> (Moving TCP.INT and NSAP.INT infrastructure domains to historic)

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

 







On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 4:02 PM, Warren Kumari <warren@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 7:46 AM, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
I do not think this last call is well-formed.  There is no link to the document and it is not available via the datatracker.  It's difficult to see how the community can successfully give advice on a matter with no document (and not even an abstract).

May I ask that the IESG consider re-issuing this last call with the appropriate pointers?


This is probably my fault - we don't do very many status-changes, and figuring out how to drive the datatracker for this is hard — the DT usually sucks in the Abstract automatically and populates the Last Call text, but because a status-change document isn't *really* a document it didn't seem to do so… 


Ah, I may have found an odd datatracker interaction — I went to restart the IETF LC, and when I clicked "Reset to template text" it generated a much more useful last call text:

"
The IESG has received a request from an individual participant to make the
following status changes:

- RFC1706 from Informational to Historic
    (DNS NSAP Resource Records)

- RFC1528 from Experimental to Historic
    (Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain: Remote Printing --
    Technical Procedures)

The supporting document for this request can be found here:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-int-tlds-to-historic/

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
last-call@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2022-04-27. Exceptionally, comments may
be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the beginning
of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

The affected documents can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc1706/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc1528/

IESG discussion of this request can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-int-tlds-to-historic/ballot/
"

This is what I was expecting the DT to send — hopefully this makes the entire thing more clear. This Last Call was only supposed to be a support document for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-davies-int-historic/ and not actually *do* anything itself…

Anyway, I'll restart the IETF LC on this status change document with a clarified LC text…

W



With that said, this is **just** the Status-Change document, and there is a link to: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-int-tlds-to-historic/

This notes that this document is the status-change (as suggested by https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/designating-rfcs-historic-2014-07-20/ and will be replaced when the "actual" document is published):
"At some point, it is sent to an appropriate AD to request publication. The AD creates a status-change document, with an explanation that points to the I-D. The I-D and the status-change are then last-called together, after which the IESG evaluates and ballots on both."

The **actual** document (which is also in Last Call) is https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-davies-int-historic/

So, this just notes that draft-davies-int-historic is making some documents historic, and that you should read that. This whole change process is somewhat baroque, especially if there is a draft doing it — someone writes a draft, it gets last-called, and you *also* have a status-change document which also gets last-called, and then the status-change document disappears in a poof of smoke and the ID replaces it when it becomes an RFC…. 

Anyway, I'll try abort this LC, and restart it with 1: TCP fixed to TPC (assuming that I can stop my fingers from autocorrecting it) and 2: the status-change text (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-int-tlds-to-historic/) copied into the Abstract / LC text…

Wheee, are we having process fun yet? :-P
W




thanks,

Ted Hardie

On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 4:08 PM The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> wrote:

The IESG has received a request from the Internet Engineering Steering Group
IETF (iesg) to consider the following document: - 'Moving TCP.INT and
NSAP.INT infrastructure domains to historic'
  <status-change-int-tlds-to-historic-00.txt>

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
last-call@ietf.org mailing lists by 2022-04-26. Exceptionally, comments may
be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning
of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract






The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-int-tlds-to-historic/



No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.





_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce

-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call

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

  Powered by Linux