Hi, Barry,
On 9/12/2012 8:13 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
I think it means "no longer current for the purposes of work and
discussion."
Nothing in the Note Well, but there is specific text in the ID Guidelines
(written by the IESG):
http://www.ietf.org/ietf-ftp/1id-guidelines.txt
8. Expiring
An Internet-Draft will expire exactly 185 days from the date that it
is posted on the IETF Web site (<http://www.ietf.org/id-info/>)
unless it is replaced by an updated version (in which case the clock
will start all over again for the new version, and the old version
will be removed from the I-D repository), or unless it is under
official review by the IESG (i.e., a request to publish it as an RFC
has been submitted)...
I.e., this is not a matter of "interpretation".
'tis, apparently, because you are still interpreting it differently to how I am.
There's nothing in the quote above that says that the expired document
will not be available *in the archive*.
There's nothing that says it won't be available by Santa Claus delivery
either. However, the document states how things will be made available,
and how that will change upon expiration.
And then the statement you cite further goes on to say this:
An expired I-D may be unexpired when necessary to further the work of
the IETF, including IETF liaison with other standards bodies. Such
action will be taken by request of an IESG member, a chair of the
working group associated with the I-D, or one of the document
authors.
That *clearly* implies that it's not *gone*, else how could it be
unexpired when necessary, by anyone's request?
Nobody is debating whether the IETF can/should have an archive. The
question is whether that archive should be public - which effectively
negates the concept of taking the doc out of the I-D repository.
And I see you selectively omitted the rest of that paragraph:
Such a request may be overridden; e.g., a chair of the
working group associated with the I-D will be notified if an author
requests unexpiration and may request that the action not occur.
This request should be sent to internet-drafts@xxxxxxxx (using the
suggested subject line "Resurrect I-D <filename>") and should come
from an author, a working group chair, or an IESG member.
I recognize the IETF might change this policy, but I want to be clear
that I don't consider this is ambiguous to date.
If the IETF wants to put all old IDs on a public site, I consider that
equivalent to unexpiration, and the authors must be given the right to
opt-out.
Joe