On Dec 8, 2024, at 10:02 AM, John Levine <johnl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It appears that touch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <touch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: >>>> I'd like us to get rid of the "expires in six months" myth. >> >> I felt the original intent had significant merit, but was undermined by permanent archive and access of drafts. > > I was under the impression that the original intent of six months was > to prevent the disk on an FTP server from filling up forty years ago. The 6-mos disappearance rule was intended in the spirit of “letters” to encourage half-baked or unbaked idea sharing. The fact that they were originally deleted after 6 mos was supposed to overcome the hesitation of a “permanent record” for the author. That’s from conversations with multiple people, including Jon and others. That’s part of why I was so vocally against archiving them except for patent disputes and why I still have not authorized the archive of any of my drafts published before the ISOC was given blanket rights for such archives. I wasn’t a file space issue, as far as I’ve ever heard. >> why people can’t be convinced to simply have another look at a document twice a year, update what needs to be updated, and resubmit. Yes, the resubmission may take 10 >> minutes, but there is only one mandatory resubmission per period versus a large number of people that will benefit from this periodic review. > > I'm sure I am not the only person here who has a script that increments the version number > and resubmits a draft. While it only takes about 15 seconds, it strikes me as performative > silliness. If there's stuff to change in a draft and it might be of interest to other > people, I'll update it. Agreed. It’s not those 15 seconds. Is that, multiple by 10, staggered over the calendar, and includes navigating near continuous changes to the submission interface as well as the additional silliness of closing the ID submission window before - but not during - IETFs. If we want to fix anything with real impact, let’s start with killing off that window. Everyone end-runs around it (posting drafts elsewhere) for documents being discussed, and it serves no purpose for docs not being discussed. Joe
