Re: Conclusion of the last call on draft-housley-two-maturity-levels

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

 



John C Klensin wrote:

--On Sunday, September 11, 2011 18:01 -0400 Hector
<sant9442@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

FWIW, I was wondering which BIS documents with no RFC
publication dates would be candidates.  93 total.

Based on the first few, there are a bunch of errors in your
list.

Yes, just imported into SQL database what Jari provided for the raw data and for the output shown below, the SQL query was:

SELECT
  draft,
  initdate,
  datediff(Now(),initdate) as days,
  revs,
  cstate
FROM idpub
  WHERE rfcdate = "0000-00-00" AND draft like "%bis%"
  ORDER by days;

Sure, there seems to have some book keeping aging in the data. i.e. duplicate records or new ones not replacing others (hence the dupes you saw), verifying some of the drafts with the actual, some had real revisions but the revision count field was 0.

I just wanted to give a rough output of those labeled as bis but did not have a RFC publishing date, sorted by the number of days from start to today.

I'd think the likely candidates of this type would be
documents that have been approved, or are near approval, for
Draft Standard.  The more interesting case would be documents
like 5321.  There is no question about either interoperability
or wide deployment and use, but, given outstanding errata, the
list of proposed changes in the YAM preevaluation document, and
other issues that have come up, I doubt that there would be
consensus for moving the existing document to full standard.  On
the other hand, this change does not increase the motivation to
do more work on it and may decrease it, so it is, as I said, and
interesting case.


I would assume those documents that have been in the IESG hands will get flushed out quickly.

For example, lets used DKIM, a query of:

select draft,
      initdate,
      iesgdays as iesg,
      datediff(Now(),initdate) as days,
      rfcdate,
      revs, cstate
     from idpub
     where draft like "%dkim%"
     order by days;

Produces:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DRAFT INITDATE IESG DAYS RFCDATE REVS CSTATE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
draft-crocker-dkim-doseta 2011-01-13 114 241 0000-00-00 0 ID Exists draft-crocker-dkim-rfc4871bis-doseta 2011-01-13 114 241 0000-00-00 0 ID Exists draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871bis 2010-08-16 304 391 0000-00-00 3 RFC Ed Queue draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists 2010-05-08 344 491 0000-00-00 2 RFC Ed Queue draft-fenton-dkim-reputation-hint 2009-02-12 180 941 0000-00-00 0 ID Exists draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871-errata 2009-01-26 87 958 2009-08-27 3 RFC Published draft-hallambaker-dkim-extensions 2008-07-02 196 1166 0000-00-00 0 ID Exists draft-ietf-marf-dkim-reporting 2007-12-03 468 1378 0000-00-00 0 AD is watching draft-ietf-dkim-deployment 2007-11-11 716 1400 2010-06-01 2 RFC Published draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements 2006-08-10 317 1858 2007-10-17 1 RFC Published draft-hallambaker-dkimpolicy 2006-06-22 180 1907 0000-00-00 0 ID Exists draft-ietf-dkim-overview 2006-06-22 857 1907 2009-07-08 2 RFC Published draft-fenton-dkim-threats 2005-09-28 2136 2174 0000-00-00 0 Dead draft-ietf-dkim-threats 2005-09-28 102 2174 2006-10-04 1 RFC Published draft-dkim-pkix 2005-09-09 185 2193 0000-00-00 0 ID Exists draft-ietf-dkim-base 2005-07-12 225 2252 2007-05-28 5 RFC Published draft-ietf-dkim-ssp 2005-07-12 452 2252 2009-08-12 4 RFC Published
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With my familiarity with DKIM, the above seems to reflect pretty close to the history. I venture among those yet to be published but in the hands of the IESG, seem to be good candidates.

draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871bis            I expect this one for sure
draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists          Maybe
draft-crocker-dkim-doseta don't know enough about it but its Crocker :) draft-crocker-dkim-rfc4871bis-doseta don't know enough about it but its Crocker :)
draft-fenton-dkim-reputation-hint     don't know enough about it
draft-hallambaker-dkim-extensions     I don't recall this one
draft-ietf-marf-dkim-reporting Seems like a moving target, so don't know.

and these probably not.

draft-hallambaker-dkimpolicy          POLICY is a deadly sin for DKIM!
draft-dkim-pkix                       don't know enough about it.

All pure SWAGGING on my part.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


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