Good point Jari, Can I also remind you to check in the RFC Errata pages to make sure you pick up any errors that have been flagged since RFC publication. Adrian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jari Arkko" <jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx> To: "IETF Discussion" <ietf@xxxxxxxx>; "Working Group Chairs" <wgchairs@xxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 10:22 AM Subject: reminder for people working on -bis documents >I have seen a number of problems recently with bis documents > accidentally ignoring changes introduced by the RFC Editor to the > original RFC. In some cases this has gone unnoticed all the way until > IETF Last Call. > > The problem is that authors start with THEIR version of the source code > for the document as opposed to the final one that was translated into > the RFC. There are a number of changes that may have been introduced > after the authors passed the document on to the final IESG approval: 1) > RFC Editor's editorial changes and language improvements, 2) reference > updates, 3) IESG's RFC Editor notes that instruct the RFC Editor to make > a particular change to fix a small issue that led to a Discuss, and 4) > actual AUTH48 changes due to some bug discovered after approval. > > Depending on the nature of the edits, missing these can be a nuisance or > a serious problem. It also makes comparison to the previous RFC > difficult. Many of us in the final review stage perform such > comparisons, as do implementors when they decide to upgrade to a newer > specification. > > Given the above, I would like to remind all authors of bis documents to > pay attention to this issue. If the original RFC was published January > 2007 or later and the document was prepared in XML, the RFC Editor > likely has XML source code for it that includes even AUTH48 changes. For > other documents, the RFC Editor has only NROFF source. These are > available by sending mail to rfc-editor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > As an example, here's what I am planning to do for a bis RFC that I was > the editor of. The RFC is too old to have XML source for the final > version, so I decided to use my own source: > > 1. Compile old source with new copyright settings etc. > 2. Use rfcdiff to compare with the original RFC > 3. Change my source until the result modulo copyright etc matches the > original RFC > 4. Publish a -00 with exactly the same contents as the original RFC > 5. Publish a -01 with the desired changes > > Jari > > _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf