From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sat Jun 3 11:47:50 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8E2312EB97 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:47:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.889 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.889 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e_GLJzQEmq3R for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:47:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D76712894A for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:47:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC864B80179; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:47:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93B9EB80172 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:47:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6QjsIVRysdg4 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yb0-x236.google.com (mail-yb0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::236]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8357CB8016D for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb0-x236.google.com with SMTP id r66so25005715yba.2 for ; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 11:47:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=NIYKumgDoTr7TtRY/Oh6VzGK1ZCSlpypZqods17kscY=; b=UvRlflb1LbsGHby408wsOTskDswVW0cGFg08iH5Mx2QAwelcD0DIhkCm438X5Js/wZ 4yvdcso+ItnEzflIydhlAKvHp+bROifLCtRQarKq0rSY5Ar7GKWpM5tnB5jBlKsBmohz Y7DlZZiRsyTfUDXF4HjnCHpkQGC6T1RT7OkYkFMFcW1PIvUK09zqYhl8kPWVBVSVcCKi Nxs/xph63Lo91eQjz8TII4zvwiYBH1Y2EJfVOXK+IXppc5ss3X4qRRtIwr8co4+wHa+u /hasyLwbemCHkZwTioXnlZjeZe4cf+BMxcfyeuQnKPjnnZbQulY7OoTn/c0xF8/OM9sR n2yA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=NIYKumgDoTr7TtRY/Oh6VzGK1ZCSlpypZqods17kscY=; b=tjcH2KQs7y4RTRcMn8D2pficabWNiBTR4KTbadH6d22jA7VNLPLjHIAIAwpKrQHoEu Z5Ncdsu92jujTWaV/IRqRSMAvDvgoixa1lD4p0hN3s7LRCbrEg1+mI0uaCXSCChaOwN/ Me+wgsQl5Kykw7WaLAea29q0I9sKk3PacCjLlT0XpuQfTadOLLlCu9M40kuk+ctmy+AK Gxlyua5gsiijt0k8fmSAwnlhR7tA1VwbqnDMZaBM1nq44nMphTqHwTRCzDrnMHJGMfSd gsi0fbtO0BMU1tfd32DGcuACI1R38FIQeJIqxqHMPG6KEImjFrv1N/WlspaBr80gO+Iv 994Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcBRA+AJbLnBEqnoggmQestnEwR49WCUlFFssNhRm1uvsvlZC3es UZJkm7aIm6Z4VNVeoJYpNTBZvQRDf3n/ X-Received: by 10.37.24.213 with SMTP id 204mr4161785yby.4.1496515664603; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 11:47:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: =?UTF-8?B?SOG6o2kgxJBvw6Bu?= Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2017 18:47:33 +0000 Message-ID: To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Subject: [rfc-i] rfc-interest X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5314992597448268835==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============5314992597448268835== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1141567e96ee94055112b47d" --001a1141567e96ee94055112b47d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" -- null --001a1141567e96ee94055112b47d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
--
null
--001a1141567e96ee94055112b47d-- --===============5314992597448268835== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============5314992597448268835==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sat Jun 3 11:48:15 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE4E1293E3 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:48:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.889 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.889 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zAWr0ErVnVf9 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:48:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2310512EBA7 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:48:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03040B80193; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:47:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4768AB80193 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:47:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6aayddgKrPIZ for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:47:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-x22e.google.com (mail-yw0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22e]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67894B80179 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 11:47:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id l75so4581687ywc.3 for ; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 11:48:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=bY+NGISklGziVWbKQjh4AzqcpbaiXL50eY8sk7Qctbc=; b=BIM8lrI7jIidsixR+/3YClbCBy0thVoYjpR8qg/sqQ9HlvpO+vI3Q7hVxolRIMmXC3 PGs8ykSpAQslkKmjrJNZUq01StzLxQvovHGwPPM+XJ831Uo7Qlc3S2WUql6XfP4k7iEy AumZKz/aCYpFc+vjkcuhxYsxBZT5pmjTRNHw0rW8YZSHZTzvDfuJyAfMkK76dFqh9ycN wQPNz2QerEjwKOpCxyarhpHXiO6xgoEuNUnYiJ5AzxJkFqGNI9xlQoKxySK0oSGkLfKo KVyxiZJbuiAQFC7iH/WZSndkyuWxe5LyH/wkXXOYsp49J2pDan8TW+5tbnc24D6Ujh8R 0uoA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=bY+NGISklGziVWbKQjh4AzqcpbaiXL50eY8sk7Qctbc=; b=qGDnTIEFi4mEbZFNDzV4RaJbX1ZlzdbfEkBXV9ZHRNl+xvoT9eqhc1rJLuUVV27rDm QKzjUiDcEbTi7JYiCFvaFNIMrg21gfBPPCtM7A3IJOyYVDsKxJnc1u41gULnSbrn+LDT QD33yzba3PoFP/LveFAPxMZn+YUCxqfI9tVmkENO0munjC4SA2W6Bu0T/UZ/pSmaAPAu OeqrpO751y7HMf2pZnx0jBITLC/kgl3Dy8ge5mFnIZajZXkeQT40CYGT/bT2HkVei9XY kj97gZO6/JOCzpJZPkcLcg+QZGlrQxoYfNnKD8lV+XfLtpOYdDkT3MQN2LtEDB6cN7FY fA5w== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcD0aiD8gsyAQ4m0n7DRP6p1Eqyh+4myEazxhD+9oh2no2wsz8xi 4ut0+86DxFJWUZGHaH1CI26P2E6N++XM X-Received: by 10.129.182.12 with SMTP id u12mr10644510ywh.140.1496515690628; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 11:48:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: =?UTF-8?B?SOG6o2kgxJBvw6Bu?= Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2017 18:48:00 +0000 Message-ID: To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Subject: [rfc-i] doanbahai12591@gmail.com X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1536884824346767155==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============1536884824346767155== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1bd89c2412ba055112b6d3" --94eb2c1bd89c2412ba055112b6d3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" -- null --94eb2c1bd89c2412ba055112b6d3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
--
null
--94eb2c1bd89c2412ba055112b6d3-- --===============1536884824346767155== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============1536884824346767155==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sat Jun 3 12:51:58 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31E9112945E for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 12:51:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.889 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.889 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o8lSQRPuIg4K for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 12:51:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 293C81270B4 for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 12:51:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F407BB80D1E; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 12:51:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA74EB80D1D for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 12:51:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z79wFgiewG9V for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 12:51:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yb0-x230.google.com (mail-yb0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::230]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A33FB80D1C for ; Sat, 3 Jun 2017 12:51:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb0-x230.google.com with SMTP id 202so25197690ybd.0 for ; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 12:51:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=5LUBXjwYbvP09DnjYTOUkgNUMp3pm+pcATmFozSM4xc=; b=Ft9HB9ld5oS6zXIfVEJ8n9fxq4numnAzNf796m4xK353qIjapuop5NRquj9XKAxa2T ONHY0vpMikN3k10jmbVVbrIXM9u+cdoYuVGojNpLi3TBBouG0UMB/9vbRDXdGH6dBD4K txK/29OqrzURDooo5Zk38mcgd+4RE4EpFdKFjRBBP7tNyOnmXwYg93ZfT2EIGqZOSy8u 3kphLcdfOmgs9rQD7Tp/ooO/dUb1iYOr0pdp2feKULOxaw8/waqvncojp5gqNnccOeV+ xmlBVmJ1ZUCTiCFOh0vrQt3mH4V2bFxpM7RyKcuLO/1j+d6Ex73tUTp5IKu+pnuGp/Hp lPAg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=5LUBXjwYbvP09DnjYTOUkgNUMp3pm+pcATmFozSM4xc=; b=Ag1amhFbB9cnhGqcfahrYJwHL09EoYniZTxwfL5oXRdmuepGhET2R4Z6YJBU6KPi51 qvRx+lhkQETGIn9ry9coL7JLrjKNSU+JyPgr/eSC+I4TvUCzKlpcpucllfgNk0KngqAw wd3Z8dkDifu1m0udtUPYZPZDLbWHtC46k76idRJpf9Xc79NqIAAZM/hAxcgjwIbMRK/2 Kcb+Bgyo1ju8lNOLDd5AiIZRPScaNKm7Tbnxw9zoW5v7u/I2yaP0n49FVPL2WvDXLtNA J/So/vTmnvd4DyydmalN0XrgYkeX0U1UjQzm00zmPx9Y5FTK1KKxptU20mC3FuzXuozE zWfg== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcD6YhZbHg3ZZ2hroFzRY2320ZM4TQKWBNfNGEAMfiP3FflUnwRH QqkEhnT8J5n7HaVyHKnxUvc83oaVh583WlE= X-Received: by 10.37.175.73 with SMTP id c9mr4480890ybj.144.1496519511487; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 12:51:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: =?UTF-8?B?SOG6o2kgxJBvw6Bu?= Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2017 19:51:41 +0000 Message-ID: To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Subject: [rfc-i] (no subject) X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2519193268484204806==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============2519193268484204806== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e0822d30ce1bc3605511399a1" --089e0822d30ce1bc3605511399a1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" -- null --089e0822d30ce1bc3605511399a1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
--
null
--089e0822d30ce1bc3605511399a1-- --===============2519193268484204806== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============2519193268484204806==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Jun 13 13:43:58 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CC4A129451 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:43:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZKeu7dz9rD9B for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:43:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C66731294DB for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:43:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB3CCB80C50; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:43:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50635B80C50 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:43:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uZM_zDgXSF0B for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:43:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0ECBB80C29 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:43:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 365661CA393 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:43:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1QoO0Z-268Aq for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:43:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D8B71CA38F for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:43:43 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: <0211abc1-06ce-0f4c-ea8b-94f3645cc582@rfc-editor.org> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:43:52 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Emails X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 3/11/17 6:05 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > : > >> 4.8.6.7. Referencing Email on Mailing Lists >> >> When referencing emails to mailing lists, the template provided here >> should be used: >> >> [reftag] Sender, A., "Subject: Subject line", message to the >> >> listname mailing list, DD Month YYYY, . > > Including the day of month in a reference is something we haven't done > before, and which xml2rc won't do in references by default. > > Given that we already have s that contain a day-of-month (for > internet drafts), is your suggestion to have this in ID references as > well? (that would at least be consistent, and consistency is good) > Internet Draft references are styled after RFC references, which do not include a specific day of publication. I think email is a very different beast, and having a date specified helps the reader find the correct message. We're trying to being consistent in like-to-like things. I understand this may require a feature request for the next xml2rfc. -Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Jun 13 13:45:02 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3626B128616 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:45:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id okAmENeR1dFM for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:45:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44AD312EAB2 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:45:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1F64B80C6F; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43262B80C6F for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wYUBFDdfNdha for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B0EEB80C6D for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C452C1CA393 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B7ju0gpAvbG2 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 982A81CA38F for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:45 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <3f85c611-126d-ea65-96e7-298a819e400e@gmx.de> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: <11c462c7-22fc-fac0-ca26-a5a4938f9c42@rfc-editor.org> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:44:55 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3f85c611-126d-ea65-96e7-298a819e400e@gmx.de> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Placement of Index X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 3/11/17 6:20 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > : > >> 4.10. Index >> >> If included, an index appears directly after any appendices and >> before the Acknowledgements (if any). Where applicable, it appears >> before the "IAB Members at the Time of Approval" section. > > From an xml2rfc point of view, that's hard to implement, as "IAB Members > at the Time of Approval" and "Acknowledgements" are regular appendices > that happen to be unnumbered (using > ). > > > Can we generalize this to: "it appears before any unnumbered appendix, > such as..."? Otherwise we'll need to come up with new markup to define > where to place the index (in which case you should raise an issue at > ). > What I would like to see is the index as the second to last thing; I think Author's Address should be last. I'm assuming, however, that will result in the same problem re: unnumbered appendixes? -Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Jun 13 13:49:44 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0527E128616 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:49:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iVQ9GTg5cuhI for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:49:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49BF8126E3A for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:49:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CDE4B80CEC; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:49:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2459B80CEC for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:49:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tkvtWB1GNGCw for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:49:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C5F0B80CEB for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:49:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B27CF1CA38F for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:49:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cwV4WTqAIw8F for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:49:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 85BFF1CA38B for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:49:28 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: <7f442b37-a7b6-cb7e-de8f-cf9acc6594cf@rfc-editor.org> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:49:37 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing RFCs X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 3/11/17 7:04 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > : > >> [RFC3080] Rose, M., "The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core," >> IETF, RFC 3080, DOI 10.17487/RFC3080, March 2001, http://www.rfc- >> editor.org/info/rfc3080 . > > I see two chaanges from RFC 7322 here: > > 1) The addition of the stream name (which I believe is a good change). > In V3, this could be implemented using (a) > or > (b) using > : > > > a) would look like: > > target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3080'> > > The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core > > > > IETF > > > > > b) would look like: > > target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3080'> > > The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core > > > > > > > > Both format require changes to the citations library. > > Format (b) has the drawback of being ambiguous, because multiple > seriesInfo elements might carry conflicting information. We'd also have > to define the special cases, both for the vocabulary (what if a W3C > document says stream="IETF"???) and the HTML spec. > > 2) The URI appears without angle brackets. I'll guess that's a > formatting error caused by xml2rfc not processing the in the > source as intended. > We can't use submissionType because it's not allowed in ? -Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Jun 13 13:54:51 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75442126E3A for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:54:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PG1ftv_KDL7E for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:54:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE32B129427 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:54:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D579AB80D1B; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:54:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F37B4B80D1B for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:54:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zw4t7XBSWkow for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F651B80D19 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 010491C52E7 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:54:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JEEKP8aBTJon for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:54:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CA98E1C3171 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:54:35 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <95fdafee-d05c-ab6a-0e15-fc6780f0f909@gmx.de> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:54:45 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <95fdafee-d05c-ab6a-0e15-fc6780f0f909@gmx.de> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing STDs and BCPs X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 3/11/17 7:35 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > : > >> For an STD or BCP that contains two or more RFCs: >> >> [STDXXX] Last name, First initial., Ed. (if applicable), "RFC >> Title", Stream, Sub-series number, RFC number, DOI, Date of >> publication. >> >> Last name, First initial., Ed. (if applicable) >> and First initial. Last name, Ed. (if applicable), >> "RFC Title", Stream, Sub-series number, RFC number, DOI, >> Date of publication. >> >> >> >> Example: >> >> [STD13] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", >> STD 13, RFC 1034, DOI 10.17487/RFC1034, November 1987. >> >> Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and >> specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, DOI 10.17487/RFC1035, >> November 1987. >> >> > > (1) It seems the formatting is broken? Is the first entry really > supposed to be different from the second one? Yes, the formatting is broken. Subseries references have long been a pain to implement; they're still not right. > > (2) Why do the individual entries not have a link to > ? Because if someone is referring to the subseries, then they should go to the subseries info page for the full list of RFCs and errata associated with that document set. > > (3) What if the spec prose actually wants to refer to one of the > documents in the document set? They they shouldn't refer to the subseries; they should just reference the individual RFC. If they want to do both (reference the subseries and later specifically reference an RFC within that subseries) then I think we're going to have a discussion with the author to figure out what exactly they are trying to do. Are they trying to point someone to whatever the current standard or best practice is, or are they trying to point to a snapshot in time? Both are perfectly reasonable things to do, and we'd adjust the references accordingly. -Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Jun 13 14:02:35 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49F091286D6 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:02:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T9v9-GGemAfw for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:02:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACE5E12773A for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:02:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88D0DB80D44; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:02:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D90A3B80D44 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:02:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UD9pJ-o4dx-T for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:02:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDBDFB80D43 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:02:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F51B1C52E7 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:02:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UDrgtiGMQ4Sr for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:02:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 06DFA1C3171 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:02:19 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:02:29 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 3/11/17 7:38 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > ...furthermore: > > : > >> (...) If the referenced I-D was >> also later published as an RFC, then that RFC must also be listed. > > There are cases where this doesn't make a lot of sense - if one cites a > specific historic Internet Draft because something that was later > removed or changed, why would it be relevant whether a later draft was > subsequently published as RFC? I can see a situation, in a purely historic context, where this might be unnecessary. I can see many more situations where having the information that an I-D became an RFC, and the fact that material was removed before approval to publish means that the material should be considered carefully in a larger context, is important. I think it's more likely to have the latter situation than the former, and so the guidance makes sense. -Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Jun 13 14:03:39 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65C12128B90 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:03:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OsHmIqWQUnNS for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:03:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DCD81286D6 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:03:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAE6DB80D4A; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:03:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38F94B80D4A for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:03:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yT8D3sFVqvGq for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:03:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 130F5B80D48 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:03:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D2591C52E7 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:03:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FcDtkuaHwkZI for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:03:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 417251C5013 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:03:25 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:03:34 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing RFCs X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 3/11/17 7:43 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2017-03-11 16:04, Julian Reschke wrote: >> : >> >>> [RFC3080] Rose, M., "The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core," >>> IETF, RFC 3080, DOI 10.17487/RFC3080, March 2001, http://www.rfc- >>> editor.org/info/rfc3080 . >> >> I see two chaanges from RFC 7322 here: >> >> 1) The addition of the stream name (which I believe is a good change). >> In V3, this could be implemented using (a) >> or >> (b) using >> : >> >> >> >> a) would look like: >> >> > target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3080'> >> >> The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core >> >> >> >> IETF >> >> >> >> >> b) would look like: >> >> > target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3080'> >> >> The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Both format require changes to the citations library. >> >> Format (b) has the drawback of being ambiguous, because multiple >> seriesInfo elements might carry conflicting information. We'd also have >> to define the special cases, both for the vocabulary (what if a W3C >> document says stream="IETF"???) and the HTML spec. >> >> 2) The URI appears without angle brackets. I'll guess that's a >> formatting error caused by xml2rfc not processing the in the >> source as intended. > > and 3): what exactly should go in for the independent stream? > > "independent" (the same thing we have in submissionType) -Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Jun 13 23:48:40 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A325129B30 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:48:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id poqmpaYOapIo for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4842912441E for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 782C4B81BFF; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:48:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B18E1B81BFF; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:48:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5qkMi8HAWT-d; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:48:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9453B81BFE; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:48:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.109.124]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Meg8W-1d9wIR1qZM-00OH8V; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:48:31 +0200 To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <95fdafee-d05c-ab6a-0e15-fc6780f0f909@gmx.de> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <6b70c6d8-4b82-6198-69a8-89a8fb14b77d@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:48:31 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:fkKwqKfiXRxllI6zYuFJcw+Li3byWMkC6MJGWC1nafHrbL3xoC+ gO6PQr3rLsJ9YEsPxeGYDHKxaAYHdn+QzaWPO2XSRGk/RvTtBPrFrZX85m1ZJw6VfIjaicS G58Ptahac8Mn4J0+ruG+7wQ5POdkG3Vf6US9TNgRpsbk22bByoZ0lduRVXp6L+mgu4E7d7E 5DIHZlYeyV+ufz0zraiAQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:YFdN+IdPxJQ=:F+gpM+eofhk3EZoAY54q08 9jFOZC+MtxTQ5xocfI56B9L4UgSG1Lh/eXOOsIqsMdR1ygZCwN1f+qcHINPWB2/COsJp1Zq7j 44pv/CWPXiijqqR7tm+3lkBmqbNVEu+6uYAQR4SJd+aauxlXSASmCKORetRiGGGtThoTZKkWH RIn24n8ETEes1FJp8Eu+xeow2pU/3/yP20FmwWmFSabQez1vrY8CpUxlEz3MeJH5IfXcpBoEC /Z4HW7mH/DN96Lsrcyip8avdnrgBvNlRvQeUXp8SI4FKsEN5meRvx9VJ3SuiFbfw4S2kx2/HI eDljVu9xqJKwTf+lAQ40nHCfp2Bk7Rg0jBxv3tPTSTbPI0z2t5vmZcOhSvMlrpILnNz0Rtd/m bBNIcpd/Afe5+avVRI/MmWXBop03UiSp/qx7aNjVgDIgLnwzl/wufY4PWeMy3FTMh93dig0xl NVA8R9msBW2BA7t/UTfEu9E/J3ZxUAB0U3L2vAVTCmclGl8RUuHHi8wpLPwk0Cxl/v4Y+w2bq /+saQaEDGDyW3piKfo3MyQFIxsMOQSlksUcst11RyDuA72wPjqO6n4cZCiMPFsDSQ7euMGnyT tBZboailw0ap6bHsLXBz9pYd42oiEJMwTK/0BoezG3OERsrMTp4WNvkYGl2akYh8vpmKc+KON VygPQQwzsPVpwW82V8GkoasdjBLxxSg8bLV7wmpEwA04SZNZyUYOnXkYo3J9/luLaTUUIkb2j Pq4ON3g0UbHUT8BfYqNQtePaVVvbYVLkB9gy8N27hqRu/mm+9jj6D+SCYffHCe5lHNh+Qv0WS vjSD6Mn Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing STDs and BCPs X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 2017-06-13 22:54, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > On 3/11/17 7:35 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> : >> >>> For an STD or BCP that contains two or more RFCs: >>> >>> [STDXXX] Last name, First initial., Ed. (if applicable), "RFC >>> Title", Stream, Sub-series number, RFC number, DOI, Date of >>> publication. >>> >>> Last name, First initial., Ed. (if applicable) >>> and First initial. Last name, Ed. (if applicable), >>> "RFC Title", Stream, Sub-series number, RFC number, DOI, >>> Date of publication. >>> >>> >>> >>> Example: >>> >>> [STD13] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", >>> STD 13, RFC 1034, DOI 10.17487/RFC1034, November 1987. >>> >>> Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and >>> specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, DOI 10.17487/RFC1035, >>> November 1987. >>> >>> >> >> (1) It seems the formatting is broken? Is the first entry really >> supposed to be different from the second one? > > Yes, the formatting is broken. Subseries references have long been a > pain to implement; they're still not right. > >> >> (2) Why do the individual entries not have a link to >> ? > > Because if someone is referring to the subseries, then they should go to > the subseries info page for the full list of RFCs and errata associated > with that document set. This creates a special case for these entries, which I believe is a bad thing. >> (3) What if the spec prose actually wants to refer to one of the >> documents in the document set? > > They they shouldn't refer to the subseries; they should just reference > the individual RFC. If they want to do both (reference the subseries and > later specifically reference an RFC within that subseries) then I think > we're going to have a discussion with the author to figure out what > exactly they are trying to do. Are they trying to point someone to > whatever the current standard or best practice is, or are they trying to > point to a snapshot in time? Both are perfectly reasonable things to do, > and we'd adjust the references accordingly. Which doesn't answer the case what to do when both is happening. Leaving this undefined until it happens is just asking for trouble. Best regards, Julian _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Jun 13 23:50:34 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B97E129541 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:50:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e4BFs70Uz1tT for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:50:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5AB712441E for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:50:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE3B0B81C0E; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:50:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0691CB81C0E; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:50:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AQD0IWNI1e4M; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:50:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1206B81C0D; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:50:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.109.124]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lp3sy-1dzZTi2kC4-00ev9B; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:50:26 +0200 To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <7f442b37-a7b6-cb7e-de8f-cf9acc6594cf@rfc-editor.org> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:50:24 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7f442b37-a7b6-cb7e-de8f-cf9acc6594cf@rfc-editor.org> Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:n2FPUgOiohUbrmQBcYtQbwm+l6NPK+f/7qYL3nl+y4QOlR0QSPY +d/aX081Xmbdq4UgA1w6UN4hMpPcLxTqOsVxtTRno1Rxc1Vm9Tbms/uZ7JZ8pxHYU+tifzj zzyrit7QEEjyBfe62jRVZofw2OXBynApoaihRR050xU6Dtm1sr4aWuQG8Kw0cUmeUs646dR cOgIj0v07s9wHvMDeV+hQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:1BQMMKKcGWU=:UcHL/tHImIIeFrsleQI39F 5rcUQQFdD3reUI3K4M7ZMwMvWlPUkjpJwcVQTM0fn530BmktfArz3rguoRfk8lgSSWVEjKoW+ ZWooKzR+UdFba95sOxUOcwnI+/aJeSnFmu+xmO/bzgL+BfhsxyXD6nC+cF5DQA/IHjmmP7wtW BlmZ4c9wMGd4+ndG8oRs3fX9INIDSgDHuxP9a4TJherwizTyZxugpiL42Hw0rEDiiAoH4olTb e83DgA4FRUHHOT8beGTaurnCA2W7xuR/iFwJ4wchwb0n/x7/0NwAbCM4lsUO6Eb11hIacmhBo bT9VteHE1AjASqfJCxBtlhy9ub6H/jWkViFBuH7g4OQCvkRevICtd1/idwBaVYTATjKuHMsGw GUnp5AlboJdTkIplRfVa14RW27TAoBGEm+mxYSDxPNkRhMFrYs8QTgMYiIQ/H4aaOIipp3ZkG TCnBuYsH6BF2Q4tyF8RNeGa2mhZ1TPxelQE/GFH1zVu+CnWV7QyGC7DsWzFqm2Wl96NvmJAxG zysHs3WEyxh1ApSfoMlw9g4/4iBFDaf7+FcuFl5SxTdH8G0xh0NW2NGdnbk2kql8NROTywVTc ylLXIFSn+tawUl4coDGmOLVk7yfA5thEptXaR1ClKea+82ZqpLCfZ1/6gGMNe0S/hKmmIarFK SAfJ28Vcmkh5uN+vV+t70JgT4z7rPcsXZDfbUu9idEGMq4mMMGWoSInZG5POtjFJKK0S271eU T/g+MoFJFZhY9n73lhQWvrodnNr3aDc/2yRSexewOMlOuv0IWtPWwH+0qdoecpx7HZET0qelz IiiCm/y Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing RFCs X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 2017-06-13 22:49, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > On 3/11/17 7:04 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> : >> >>> [RFC3080] Rose, M., "The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core," >>> IETF, RFC 3080, DOI 10.17487/RFC3080, March 2001, http://www.rfc- >>> editor.org/info/rfc3080 . >> >> I see two chaanges from RFC 7322 here: >> >> 1) The addition of the stream name (which I believe is a good change). >> In V3, this could be implemented using (a) >> or >> (b) using >> : >> >> >> a) would look like: >> >> > target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3080'> >> >> The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core >> >> >> >> IETF >> >> >> >> >> b) would look like: >> >> > target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3080'> >> >> The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Both format require changes to the citations library. >> >> Format (b) has the drawback of being ambiguous, because multiple >> seriesInfo elements might carry conflicting information. We'd also have >> to define the special cases, both for the vocabulary (what if a W3C >> document says stream="IETF"???) and the HTML spec. >> >> 2) The URI appears without angle brackets. I'll guess that's a >> formatting error caused by xml2rfc not processing the in the >> source as intended. >> > > We can't use submissionType because it's not allowed in ? Correct. Best regards, Julian _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Jun 13 23:51:43 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F589129541 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:51:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lhqqTSHSBuJR for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4C4612441E for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15C73B81C12; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:51:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0356DB81C12; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:51:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q197BJYD6LY5; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B9B4B81C0E; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.109.124]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MA91t-1dWKoL0uLp-00BOOj; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:51:36 +0200 To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <4a0bf8d4-45e6-5d10-b8a6-facf10a6a050@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:51:35 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:4on+95hoJdtWn3L65F2z7HIYJdsYW3AAeB4S0hyrbjPQbKX6ZOg UXkWSfxA664ayJLbwEgY7xxV2ac9NZW78m8J3S4SJf+NmP0Ci6LTS+QaFZd/8DA0mlNTfho YLcyDUAoHz97keteta3FbdMF0SGM43WcZh05YDgGhebjPGLLpSnIhdhxY6uNKYG/t+zXQCC jY6ntFGyq7uX3oZX0Gh/w== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:wQndQw3vQfA=:RbornXRgAGbNZPi/6Z1Xpv X23hK+jdk8r4GiXWJrovfaU4cgw/wk6Z5r619JgfHwovIeYFuMnygy64cpsyfw/+8O8Ui6zoR 0J8VwL1NJKP3c/RamjFWmzi8fu0oOG5mzE+Pv3/leSzVf8btQT7xg/rpQ+P9j+9LKIl3fV3A2 ISvGIHNMSk1DMXY3Z+Qf3fOyDj79m3mGoRUnCm4oZkTbF/SJGL01gD3Eq6+g5vIvKE3tOWqqo ZLGKpFrRxFNYM0535SeMCfAwryOrynVty0jpWhfZtceYUP71tLrRdlUaDNQbaGMqdMjRCLVbE tXKDGKdtcMFMsR6Oxh/ptgdC2/8ONb0P8vVFcF3lXBrpnM8AhvbZ/lJQ0yZaPir8c91XIN3Uj TCa7kXIofd0+ZBoQxcKMO/t9kJF0l3p6t1IMYr1IFQ7LfK2K8xdM14/hj4ZYJQCi8u2kypxpD IHdr/Ht4Hz8b6DeDytdL6VQv0Cf5s9+hflXm9hKfDFTL3Ls+KIJC8jxJvyyNWT+waJ/nhbsN9 Q1qBv1s03y4jh3WwyT1Js8YXwweE6SyHGz27jIId+qyvaEb+S+E92PxDTsHm18dVSPps/rVuB 5vSOwBp7bVdv5luyaolF95qrpQBvXx+WiVadBVZwvZmCrgBpkNGV8XJGYMD9157G7bg24F4Xl YTJblp6OfG5YnRBgnTUmcJNMJN3n24vRgJhRPPxp7cgMpGC4+4amSSLfJyQnSp3XluinJDF3c hv4mHxWtlMqnfhbe4u0YHkW3CCo0V+77yXMgNqKtFndqkUuwBJgAtD896clJkRRFF/ka4Ezot LLD5bpe Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 2017-06-13 23:02, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > On 3/11/17 7:38 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> ...furthermore: >> >> : >> >>> (...) If the referenced I-D was >>> also later published as an RFC, then that RFC must also be listed. >> >> There are cases where this doesn't make a lot of sense - if one cites a >> specific historic Internet Draft because something that was later >> removed or changed, why would it be relevant whether a later draft was >> subsequently published as RFC? > > I can see a situation, in a purely historic context, where this might be > unnecessary. I can see many more situations where having the information > that an I-D became an RFC, and the fact that material was removed before > approval to publish means that the material should be considered > carefully in a larger context, is important. I think it's more likely to > have the latter situation than the former, and so the guidance makes sense. Is it "guidance" or a requirement? In the former case, please avoid the term "must". Best regards, Julian _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Jun 13 23:57:40 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3F3A129541 for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:57:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XGSlDOVKqHZh for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:57:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CA4E12441E for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:57:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A539EB81C2F; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:57:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 327E4B81C2F; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:57:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sII-usEtgPDd; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:57:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9337FB81C2E; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 23:57:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.109.124]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MV5hN-1dK99V0fFt-00YQbk; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:57:33 +0200 To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <0211abc1-06ce-0f4c-ea8b-94f3645cc582@rfc-editor.org> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:57:31 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0211abc1-06ce-0f4c-ea8b-94f3645cc582@rfc-editor.org> Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:wRmTNSzQSaH+t8EMc6ufFw0J/jMInVRXxIR6yDYnczkMvzz2Rin iSa238L0JqFbaDVtdDcIgmOZl4MRHEvTtszgBljdlnpQFJ90GAMGjGVC+qzLv7llLAnyX0a 8/hHdCQKC21oIxSZfwRC45Td7aCyiqptAtgrPPd9UtlMFbWximhs8FOZqJhPoIQHHNavdzE AC8c/eFGkl4d/q7vgdiDQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:mfTeH1Hkeyo=:FhV822FIwfH5SdR0uUw7YN XCMGualYgl4OSWMzB+IB3p4L/HvUUT8DboCyYKHLjrRqzjISLLt/Qk4DvewCidkEa9NsdTGBd wY3qry52gwxp7wRutOd1pbJMVY+LvsftPUCJPWQcDz9RyTHftpn4xjSZ2Mgd/b1yqHaKzxNSU Kd+xuDnVXsDx+cX6mehagpWu1b3LKYAADotazMxUIp9A2zAjY+r2wE5e1GYMgpGJFe+qApUtJ dKtzjuBi0d5jru1Ol5zkKmCz8Z/MPiR5haS7Mzkbo8bMJun8PsDBx2/4FfxPPBvgRzzhkU30d 5qFx/0YB7+CTOeLB2ldacgw3Z9QC4vjHb68LmVfRzLZVOteka+OwAOe+l6GscFKZ+f/9yKUYr VEAm/NHvPsp9O3W5S/zPRspKVCOqcaM43IpBk56RuQQhIBVZ31QBHqZjRWDPtl0SiqIBftmH0 VChbNm0ulBTnoqZ2SsPEFul7IVoH6I2dfnx+kG3YWVStsPYR7hNaKf18BWT0EoM3c6RHwB+Rb 66NhOZX4hMQ56njJKy9zVGtjbcbacHR8HPGgjQs6JUVe7sNCaOPZMZ5YHURpP4sTfLrs1jPDW +BjALQCVRDtDsbU99UrGsmtOfnVm/3eed5+Nw4cndsqPs34RHuDXLIVXk5hcgqYDxR8cYeQ0v wW7ZY0PloEmkjmlzkvBPsUBfEk3ieFw9TCxzF9L5WVH0aqOMRyMNZb25yT0hAU9USOGaZk/+8 jvZjJWGVYC6FYepnHoA9D7FcuarllPotv5Nn/3K7mQN68ns0fDMP6OVSNMRHWF8efWkylnsNt d3iGmD/ Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Emails X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 2017-06-13 22:43, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > On 3/11/17 6:05 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> : >> >>> 4.8.6.7. Referencing Email on Mailing Lists >>> >>> When referencing emails to mailing lists, the template provided here >>> should be used: >>> >>> [reftag] Sender, A., "Subject: Subject line", message to the >>> >>> listname mailing list, DD Month YYYY, . >> >> Including the day of month in a reference is something we haven't done >> before, and which xml2rc won't do in references by default. >> >> Given that we already have s that contain a day-of-month (for >> internet drafts), is your suggestion to have this in ID references as >> well? (that would at least be consistent, and consistency is good) >> > > Internet Draft references are styled after RFC references, which do not > include a specific day of publication. I think email is a very different > beast, and having a date specified helps the reader find the correct > message. We're trying to being consistent in like-to-like things. > > I understand this may require a feature request for the next xml2rfc. Actually, what's *more* helpful to the reader would be an archive URL (and potentially the mid). That said, is there any proposal to use the day in month in other references as well? For instance, W3C specs do have it in their boilerplate, so it's not clear why we wouldn't include that as well... Best regards, Julian _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Wed Jun 14 01:37:15 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24F96128854 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 01:37:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qJ2rWElrxed9 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 01:37:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84058128656 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 01:37:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C87C8B80C89; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 01:37:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B847CB80C89; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 01:36:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NB72u3Ol-O9v; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 01:36:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6F1BB80C85; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 01:36:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.201.11]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v5E8b5ZR022971; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 10:37:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from client-0119.vpn.uni-bremen.de (client-0119.vpn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.107.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3wng3j02lKz3ZZy; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 10:37:04 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 10:37:04 +0200 X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 519122224.019716-790c92905e7afbe1a12807eb2e67ef45 Message-Id: <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" T24gSnVuIDEzLCAyMDE3LCBhdCAyMzowMiwgSGVhdGhlciBGbGFuYWdhbiAoUkZDIFNlcmllcyBF ZGl0b3IpIDxyc2VAcmZjLWVkaXRvci5vcmc+IHdyb3RlOgo+IAo+IEkgY2FuIHNlZSBhIHNpdHVh dGlvbiwgaW4gYSBwdXJlbHkgaGlzdG9yaWMgY29udGV4dCwgd2hlcmUgdGhpcyBtaWdodCBiZQo+ IHVubmVjZXNzYXJ5LiAKCihDZXRlcnVtIGNlbnNlbzopCgpJIGJlbGlldmUgaXQgd291bGQgYmUg YSBnb29kIHRoaW5nIHRvIGNsZWFybHkgaWRlbnRpZnkg4oCcaGlzdG9yaWNhbOKAnSgqKSByZWZl cmVuY2VzIChhcyBpbjogaGVyZSB5b3UgY2FuIGZpbmQgb3V0IGhvdyB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGNh bWUgdG8gYmUgdGhlIHdheSBpdCBpcykgYXMgYSBzZXBhcmF0ZSBjbGFzcyBmcm9tIG90aGVyIOKA nGluZm9ybWF0aXZl4oCdIChhcyBpbjogaGVyZSBpcyBtb3JlIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIHRoYXQgaGVs cHMgaW4gcHJvY2Vzc2luZyB0aGUgdGVjaG5pY2FsIGNvbnRlbnQgb2YgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCkg b25lcy4KClRoZSBydWxlIGJlaW5nIGRpc2N1c3NlZCB3b3VsZCB0aGVuIGFwcGx5IHRvIGluZm9y bWF0aXZlLCBub3QgdG8gaGlzdG9yaWNhbCwgcmVmZXJlbmNlcy4KCkdyw7zDn2UsIENhcnN0ZW4K CigqKSDigJxoaXN0b3JpY2FsIiBhcyBpbiBkb2N1bWVudGVkLCBhcmNoaXZhbCwgY2hyb25pY2xl ZCwgbm90IOKAnGhpc3RvcmljIiBhcyBpbiBzaWduaWZpY2FudCwgbm90YWJsZSwgbW9tZW50b3Vz LCBjb25zZXF1ZW50aWFsLCBtZW1vcmFibGUsIHVuZm9yZ2V0dGFibGUsIHJlbWFya2FibGU7IGZh bW91cywgZmFtZWQsIGNlbGVicmF0ZWQsIHJlbm93bmVkLCBsZWdlbmRhcnk7IGxhbmRtYXJrLCBz ZW5zYXRpb25hbCwgZ3JvdW5kYnJlYWtpbmcsIGVwb2NoLW1ha2luZywgZWFydGgtc2hhdHRlcmlu Zy4KCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCnJmYy1p bnRlcmVzdCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKcmZjLWludGVyZXN0QHJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnCmh0dHBzOi8v d3d3LnJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vcmZjLWludGVyZXN0Cg== From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Wed Jun 14 17:03:31 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0418A127F0E for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 17:03:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.891 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.891 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SOFN8dJZW_QZ for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 17:03:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36825126D85 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 17:03:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9E47B80DE1; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 17:03:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA581B80DE1 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 17:03:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id upGK_AEwY-0U for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 17:03:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg0-x236.google.com (mail-pg0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::236]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0809DB80DE0 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 17:03:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg0-x236.google.com with SMTP id f185so6966616pgc.0 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 17:03:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ivvensT50btlgco3U9/gGzQyn7jQIqVCG5V/mKBOABY=; b=AyQWs+wau+gVwNi7zRtWdcFM5BZwiFqfqfOpm1sPx8Sw/Ev0dvMTQttIg//8WDqfLx Smdlg7QD4/g5US3Jwa/4Mn7Ni3kxa8B2XgAskbyRQzASYjcHNDFBHVY0xc5JaAuO23/Q fcUAAvCrrTvcWSqtpToYWsbjD9zMef+pqJZNLSX/rcWoJSDijwb1amrxkJF2TSsSC/Cn PZ1c3AsCisBYUtDFCRfjShXH/mlZThR+1FaPNNSBnEDzsUPpwAHdBAwiYB/mOiL4QOV4 oEkXIQHgJLo6Ef64ZRsynX3HRuPLY0KRmHfIo2zC822VcdSFKahjflNXUaMraK0NHX35 EsBg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ivvensT50btlgco3U9/gGzQyn7jQIqVCG5V/mKBOABY=; b=anpGmGDBjHLDVR7Pj5lysOWEr4Lbj6Dq/7emCvONjCTWbum9ZRDIKLiV4iAJH+qmxM ZJerNu4XaqkQx8C5HAeBCSEncd5kQl6lkc9Ob49whDYgFr6LYesdPPEqww5S8ktnYVfY iznhQy1SIu2KxF2i9JoLMqxtSjrc4dLKoJ7UStzEmbbZPPSHdK2T5B09HM4j2SLW6Hst p+AJM/qgKeZ1lmnBawMH1NTuwfkgOpFfI4+ga7jDFIQf9vok1NPuXvd9+ztvW1zhVGzb SOCLmJzFVahXbJqmxYWo/xze4GNMnQFCicr1t9+qN75OmKoMIUcUFkSXjaN3ajBnRjal pyBQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOwgE0lbvmjfby6Qc0SArmilpPfpXcDt9G4yJ4KPlXIbfBVHNwN4 /U2FAsV8oLNU5aJl X-Received: by 10.84.133.100 with SMTP id 91mr2918959plf.106.1497485003846; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 17:03:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.21] ([118.148.126.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y2sm91026pgy.60.2017.06.14.17.03.22 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 14 Jun 2017 17:03:23 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 12:03:26 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" T24gMTQvMDYvMjAxNyAyMDozNywgQ2Fyc3RlbiBCb3JtYW5uIHdyb3RlOgo+IE9uIEp1biAxMywg MjAxNywgYXQgMjM6MDIsIEhlYXRoZXIgRmxhbmFnYW4gKFJGQyBTZXJpZXMgRWRpdG9yKSA8cnNl QHJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnPiB3cm90ZToKPj4KPj4gSSBjYW4gc2VlIGEgc2l0dWF0aW9uLCBpbiBh IHB1cmVseSBoaXN0b3JpYyBjb250ZXh0LCB3aGVyZSB0aGlzIG1pZ2h0IGJlCj4+IHVubmVjZXNz YXJ5LiAKPiAKPiAoQ2V0ZXJ1bSBjZW5zZW86KQo+IAo+IEkgYmVsaWV2ZSBpdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBh IGdvb2QgdGhpbmcgdG8gY2xlYXJseSBpZGVudGlmeSDigJxoaXN0b3JpY2Fs4oCdKCopIHJlZmVy ZW5jZXMgKGFzIGluOiBoZXJlIHlvdSBjYW4gZmluZCBvdXQgaG93IHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgY2Ft ZSB0byBiZSB0aGUgd2F5IGl0IGlzKSBhcyBhIHNlcGFyYXRlIGNsYXNzIGZyb20gb3RoZXIg4oCc aW5mb3JtYXRpdmXigJ0gKGFzIGluOiBoZXJlIGlzIG1vcmUgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gdGhhdCBoZWxw cyBpbiBwcm9jZXNzaW5nIHRoZSB0ZWNobmljYWwgY29udGVudCBvZiB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50KSBv bmVzLgo+IAo+IFRoZSBydWxlIGJlaW5nIGRpc2N1c3NlZCB3b3VsZCB0aGVuIGFwcGx5IHRvIGlu Zm9ybWF0aXZlLCBub3QgdG8gaGlzdG9yaWNhbCwgcmVmZXJlbmNlcy4KClRoaXMgdHJpZ2dlcnMg b25lIG9mIG15IGhvYmJ5LWhvcnNlcywgSSdtIGFmcmFpZC4KCklmIEkgcmVmZXIgdG8gYW4gSS1E IGJlY2F1c2UgaXQncyB1c2VmdWwgcmVhZGluZyBidXQgbm90IHlldCBwdWJsaXNoZWQsIEknbSBo YXBweSB3aXRoIGl0IGJlaW5nIHRhZ2dlZCBhcyAiV29yayBpbiBwcm9ncmVzcyIuIEEgc21hcnQg cmVhZGVyIG1heSBldmVuIGhhdmUgdGhlIGlkZWEgdG8gbG9vayBmb3IgYSBjb3JyZXNwb25kaW5n IFJGQy4KCklmIEkgcmVmZXIgdG8gYW4gSS1EIGJlY2F1c2UgaXQgaGFzIGhpc3RvcmljYWwgdmFs dWUsIEkgd291bGQgcHJlZmVyIGl0IHRvIGJlIHRhZ2dlZCBhcyAiVW5wdWJsaXNoZWQgZHJhZnQi IGFuZCBoYXZlIGFuIGV4YWN0IHZlcnNpb24gbnVtYmVyIChhbmQgZGF0ZSkuIENhbGxpbmcgaXQg IldvcmsgaW4gcHJvZ3Jlc3MiIGlzIGVpdGhlciBpbmFwcHJvcHJpYXRlIG9yIHNpbXBseSB1bnRy dWUuCgpUb2RheSB3ZSBoYXZlIG5vIG1ldGFkYXRhIHRvIHNlcGFyYXRlIHRoZSB0d28gY2FzZXMu CgogICBCcmlhbgoKPiAKPiBHcsO8w59lLCBDYXJzdGVuCj4gCj4gKCopIOKAnGhpc3RvcmljYWwi IGFzIGluIGRvY3VtZW50ZWQsIGFyY2hpdmFsLCBjaHJvbmljbGVkLCBub3Qg4oCcaGlzdG9yaWMi IGFzIGluIHNpZ25pZmljYW50LCBub3RhYmxlLCBtb21lbnRvdXMsIGNvbnNlcXVlbnRpYWwsIG1l bW9yYWJsZSwgdW5mb3JnZXR0YWJsZSwgcmVtYXJrYWJsZTsgZmFtb3VzLCBmYW1lZCwgY2VsZWJy YXRlZCwgcmVub3duZWQsIGxlZ2VuZGFyeTsgbGFuZG1hcmssIHNlbnNhdGlvbmFsLCBncm91bmRi cmVha2luZywgZXBvY2gtbWFraW5nLCBlYXJ0aC1zaGF0dGVyaW5nLgo+IAo+IF9fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCj4gcmZjLWludGVyZXN0IG1haWxp bmcgbGlzdAo+IHJmYy1pbnRlcmVzdEByZmMtZWRpdG9yLm9yZwo+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnJmYy1l ZGl0b3Iub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vcmZjLWludGVyZXN0Cj4gCgpfX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXwpyZmMtaW50ZXJlc3QgbWFpbGluZyBs aXN0CnJmYy1pbnRlcmVzdEByZmMtZWRpdG9yLm9yZwpodHRwczovL3d3dy5yZmMtZWRpdG9yLm9y Zy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3JmYy1pbnRlcmVzdAo= From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Thu Jun 15 01:37:47 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC1A6129B29 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 01:37:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EpaaJ1QoAnF4 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 01:37:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 605E4129B23 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 01:37:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77784B810E2; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 01:37:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B787B810E2 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 01:37:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0jTs-P6hGAet for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 01:37:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 138DAB810E0 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 01:37:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.81.203]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LzoSt-1dq3zW2zT9-0155Ut; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 10:37:38 +0200 To: Brian E Carpenter , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 10:37:34 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:v07RRSswkdeptXz8EI3Q5T3EUviv8HKeHb65KEPyJ0h3OSzEwNh JxmjjvVg8g9rH8NVNraPSzrnIcCDvyNed+2yTWsXfmXFpV26LaTXl0/ixsyewcKMdbXst9b RIw/hyYrDRMWaw/IYgLFNozEa+Wi17fuzl5E9h35klPo604qr0eAjHx9HSjIc2e+xCu1fUG e9N+b8/D6OFfxZ6aqbSsQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:6KTAWKXEFhs=:52j9OEMTvhvrGlhd4Gmqxv 2caXtZerirHf327YXffvc2gHFH6+PkPJ2ab6xtUtvnJidb3Mhm19CfNG58/UBumluaBs+xmr+ LUtheJDp28zvNoE36GuBSaZvt/XrjjcN0GUxleCP1uQ3o18Eb57ao9ZpqUR71qUxFKlFAmY+C t4+BXaVqPIGRaFIL1BKj2Fu/HVvdOd0a2rs+VqEud9deKwDYvt4wKNosU3ERNhvEuCnsaPbZ7 gZkIB8s9dr2T3IfDhjUIwx1azXM9uekZ7AktfWp6o1qa58FgGtvoSmjFPPFGRs8LfB1+s3rJJ LRoYGYc0OYfIEOklONKqdkGZIwVG3tkJ0/JTmYCpN9lm5P+Ldd8mjf0zZC5TjAlT82U6M4DnU E9177Ag5bChAAyOJrR+onKByifpJ7FEg3+fdyhJbCBFBHaLiU+zZC3FcCdYh43/8TXAAzheEq uTW6NMMvvpnR8jt4IIGaZiFo7z1Xqb6RRGC9XibYM27ZLBNx50spKgpPLfIMRN5Pv/7Mk1R4p F8gc1/7G0YeCTtMJGjy0+tLkM9X5bRjdDXlhKVDzQ8Q8JLcB5WKe1GXBTshauyvRvoBj/Zt/d CIm2iTGSz6XkbUxTJ9pPv1/qX9Mpc4fXvXoA39wa+MLqAZwCAQq4eyWhyDVxwU2gjfRVjYAfm 622GIujfBLkRlDCEh1aqsww9u2VsV6oCQPcZqma/a2HyVuLnrNwZx92lypiV/kW2nRi6GHN/N /ltl9gQH8tvT4gs47/kmtcosGoBMqPu7wCqZyxy287UUS3ivmtfGgO8Ix7jyUyRlV31D83lw6 dI/n6Yg Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 2017-06-15 02:03, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >... > > This triggers one of my hobby-horses, I'm afraid. > > If I refer to an I-D because it's useful reading but not yet published, I'm happy with it being tagged as "Work in progress". A smart reader may even have the idea to look for a corresponding RFC. > > If I refer to an I-D because it has historical value, I would prefer it to be tagged as "Unpublished draft" and have an exact version number (and date). Calling it "Work in progress" is either inappropriate or simply untrue. > > Today we have no metadata to separate the two cases. > ... +1 Best regard, Julian _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Thu Jun 15 11:38:57 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C024A1200FC for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:38:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.89 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X8MqPGOM3gn6 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBBA71286B1 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 761A3B814C2; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:38:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4971CB814C2 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:38:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f2w75YDjq7yz for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:38:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x22e.google.com (mail-it0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22e]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2570B814C1 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:38:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id b205so1245276itg.1 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:38:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=0KVN1lxlpwpALqqYvxFIOV83ATjVqgxBlFCgKRGt9kQ=; b=DygxN1I1IK1QLqPHxlcQmhf3KMXrrzRZz7P/+zkFLnfarEc8lk4AKUWg0kYnRuHfox I/ZQ3KVCmFaar/aVcaBMyftXSZKcibSs14pcfaKg4bcYUTuZAP2FKAwLUL0o0SOwmK1Z /i4nkz593GCm4F1O1b9hmWexw+CoVNI0ONk/vGGQRKH7YmH90a2l5LFcmF5xbmF+f4Gh ppI3g1yyqlP9PnmxNtIR8xag4OM2FYLUiYLXs/Nh0izu4XxXIz90RogU4iL16qErai8u wP1wohQWMsjDUedzeaZ7FLE/GUZPkUa9oTYvHPvPPKgZJfbigCtRx/FujXUKcDz2oqI7 CAhw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=0KVN1lxlpwpALqqYvxFIOV83ATjVqgxBlFCgKRGt9kQ=; b=oIVrzGfjYYUVjrcJW/nh0ImHjL1eiaMzuFVWsJ8A5EgWJTqlobKMARW4mReKJAW67o 1AwBlgRK9175ul2jkT+gRuDQE53fixana2fpryz3bFwMBUVeEfEf6deiskIg/YzmXP7h CQzpNnaxF75tFZ1T0bTZDGoH5Rq0SXnCkSDjnxTRM86j4/1l+dbEJyg1jwZowH7YjkQW ffAWxMMSgTfYHq40RLGkf93HBgx+9zD7uAbDKVLpdDUF+4He1tK9NOmFSmUh1IQfzYva 94cNY2wc+iiC9phsJa92+R05nl6BTsvA3AmMH70RnG+86D0ro6biXoxbYMp/s1bM/8mC YXrw== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOyt/Pex0gNs7GzE6dboY0/d4Uf1I2GkJ9tnQT1Y751CzPZEo/vG qlTTna2xTL7O8g== X-Received: by 10.36.125.208 with SMTP id b199mr6660252itc.87.1497551930611; Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:38:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.224.219] ([209.97.127.34]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i73sm439628ioi.30.2017.06.15.11.38.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:38:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Hinden Message-Id: <030DC553-3338-476F-A077-529F0193BEF1@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:38:48 -0700 In-Reply-To: To: Julian Reschke References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org, Bob Hinden Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9161970423426587846==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============9161970423426587846== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_592B5628-6377-4E8E-AB86-9201210ED32D"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 --Apple-Mail=_592B5628-6377-4E8E-AB86-9201210ED32D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On Jun 15, 2017, at 1:37 AM, Julian Reschke = wrote: >=20 > On 2017-06-15 02:03, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> ... >> This triggers one of my hobby-horses, I'm afraid. >> If I refer to an I-D because it's useful reading but not yet = published, I'm happy with it being tagged as "Work in progress". A smart = reader may even have the idea to look for a corresponding RFC. >> If I refer to an I-D because it has historical value, I would prefer = it to be tagged as "Unpublished draft" and have an exact version number = (and date). Calling it "Work in progress" is either inappropriate or = simply untrue. >> Today we have no metadata to separate the two cases. >> ... >=20 > +1 >=20 I tend to agree as well. Though I am not sure =E2=80=9Cunpublished = draft=E2=80=9D is exactly right since the draft is available online. We = treat Internet Drafts as temporary, and at the same time permanent. = Starting to seem more like the later. Why don=E2=80=99t we include a link to the Internet Draft in the = reference like we do for RFCs? Thanks, Bob --Apple-Mail=_592B5628-6377-4E8E-AB86-9201210ED32D Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJZQtQ5AAoJEK7rdBF357uoEC0H/ioqOuNINLArlqIHEf5F/Kxc n4knmPz3EHy/uNicP9svYLef5lM+wN62VqJsfQDVoIHMkUAmmZcumSx5EAUjAJFd bBVeaqhDmqM6TfgM1xO4HeKdoa58zcdOrHSNd7SvcGvsD5ySGDRv0uSvc07N2EaY o1u3u0JJI9UsAMZhlBOqWgM8q38p+jU5SDBNa3F2Raf+cI2XfDc4oY9MXP1iyA4T Z9Htwpd9KmSMV1D0zw4amlPCxJMyneS0LooZLjCWv0bloQd6XAms33rTIO26dm9/ Vry3a3R4DF990VQHBNYLvjP41JFNWrMAzkFX2CSRiWBq4R2GPwtvdvbnyf1Bc20= =LApQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_592B5628-6377-4E8E-AB86-9201210ED32D-- --===============9161970423426587846== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============9161970423426587846==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:06:54 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 047AB129BD4 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:06:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i5TTD0E4IYn0 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:06:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 137A01294CC for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:06:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 845CDB80CAB; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:06:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC936B80CAB for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:06:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AZi2-cLUpGCW for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:06:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC5CCB80CAA for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:06:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B539B1CA52F; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:06:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FVuZ1gCDcD5Q; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:06:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 82F121CA514; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:06:35 -0700 (PDT) To: Julian Reschke , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <95fdafee-d05c-ab6a-0e15-fc6780f0f909@gmx.de> <6b70c6d8-4b82-6198-69a8-89a8fb14b77d@gmx.de> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: <60634b87-fe8a-1081-54e2-db0636efe4d1@rfc-editor.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:06:47 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6b70c6d8-4b82-6198-69a8-89a8fb14b77d@gmx.de> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing STDs and BCPs X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 6/13/17 11:48 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2017-06-13 22:54, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >> On 3/11/17 7:35 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >>> : >>> >>> >>>> For an STD or BCP that contains two or more RFCs: >>>> >>>> [STDXXX] Last name, First initial., Ed. (if applicable), "RFC >>>> Title", Stream, Sub-series number, RFC number, DOI, Date of >>>> publication. >>>> >>>> Last name, First initial., Ed. (if applicable) >>>> and First initial. Last name, Ed. (if applicable), >>>> "RFC Title", Stream, Sub-series number, RFC number, DOI, >>>> Date of publication. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Example: >>>> >>>> [STD13] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and >>>> facilities", >>>> STD 13, RFC 1034, DOI 10.17487/RFC1034, November 1987. >>>> >>>> Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and >>>> specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, DOI 10.17487/RFC1035, >>>> November 1987. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> (1) It seems the formatting is broken? Is the first entry really >>> supposed to be different from the second one? >> >> Yes, the formatting is broken. Subseries references have long been a >> pain to implement; they're still not right. >> >>> >>> (2) Why do the individual entries not have a link to >>> ? >> >> Because if someone is referring to the subseries, then they should go to >> the subseries info page for the full list of RFCs and errata associated >> with that document set. > > This creates a special case for these entries, which I believe is a > bad thing. I don't think it is a special case, per se. I think this is the case of how to handle sub-series. They are a slightly different beast than just straight RFCs. > >>> (3) What if the spec prose actually wants to refer to one of the >>> documents in the document set? >> >> They they shouldn't refer to the subseries; they should just reference >> the individual RFC. If they want to do both (reference the subseries and >> later specifically reference an RFC within that subseries) then I think >> we're going to have a discussion with the author to figure out what >> exactly they are trying to do. Are they trying to point someone to >> whatever the current standard or best practice is, or are they trying to >> point to a snapshot in time? Both are perfectly reasonable things to do, >> and we'd adjust the references accordingly. > > Which doesn't answer the case what to do when both is happening. > Leaving this undefined until it happens is just asking for trouble. So, you're asking about when someone wants to refer to the current documents in the subseries, AND refer to a specific RFC that happens to be in the subseries at the time of publication? I don't see anything preventing that, though it likely will result in a conversation between the authors and RPC to make sure the intent is clear. -HEather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:07:38 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8021512F274 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:07:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G9X0x4_WdQ4w for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:07:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A17012F28C for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:07:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B79B5B80CDA; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:07:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0D9EB80CB8 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:07:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vFYhipOqTf2j for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E410B80CB5 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ECB11CA522; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:07:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fr_O1j6iheBZ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:07:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1CF191CA514; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:07:20 -0700 (PDT) To: Julian Reschke , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <7f442b37-a7b6-cb7e-de8f-cf9acc6594cf@rfc-editor.org> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: <1a80f928-4de4-2273-a524-986cbcaa8fc9@rfc-editor.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:07:32 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing RFCs X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 6/13/17 11:50 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2017-06-13 22:49, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >> On 3/11/17 7:04 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >>> : >>> >>> >>>> [RFC3080] Rose, M., "The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol >>>> Core," >>>> IETF, RFC 3080, DOI 10.17487/RFC3080, March 2001, http://www.rfc- >>>> editor.org/info/rfc3080 . >>> >>> I see two chaanges from RFC 7322 here: >>> >>> 1) The addition of the stream name (which I believe is a good change). >>> In V3, this could be implemented using (a) >>> or >>> (b) using >>> : >>> >>> >>> >>> a) would look like: >>> >>> >> target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3080'> >>> >>> The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core >>> >>> >>> >>> IETF >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> b) would look like: >>> >>> >> target='http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3080'> >>> >>> The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol Core >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Both format require changes to the citations library. >>> >>> Format (b) has the drawback of being ambiguous, because multiple >>> seriesInfo elements might carry conflicting information. We'd also have >>> to define the special cases, both for the vocabulary (what if a W3C >>> document says stream="IETF"???) and the HTML spec. >>> >>> 2) The URI appears without angle brackets. I'll guess that's a >>> formatting error caused by xml2rfc not processing the in the >>> source as intended. >>> >> >> We can't use submissionType because it's not allowed in ? > > Correct. Can we change the vocabulary to allow that? What would that break? -Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:11:52 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BADB1294EF for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:11:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MbSgoKLg1kqd for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:11:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A144B127137 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:11:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EB7BB8014C; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:11:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D1BCB8014A for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:11:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NPJKt5rLwwUn for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:11:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24E6DB80147 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:11:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FAD81CA514; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:11:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OIRf79249UKU; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:11:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DC00D1C3171; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:11:33 -0700 (PDT) To: Julian Reschke , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <0211abc1-06ce-0f4c-ea8b-94f3645cc582@rfc-editor.org> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:11:45 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Emails X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 6/13/17 11:57 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2017-06-13 22:43, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >> On 3/11/17 6:05 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >>> : >>> >>> >>>> 4.8.6.7. Referencing Email on Mailing Lists >>>> >>>> When referencing emails to mailing lists, the template provided >>>> here >>>> should be used: >>>> >>>> [reftag] Sender, A., "Subject: Subject line", message to the >>>> >>>> listname mailing list, DD Month YYYY, . >>> >>> Including the day of month in a reference is something we haven't done >>> before, and which xml2rc won't do in references by default. >>> >>> Given that we already have s that contain a day-of-month >>> (for >>> internet drafts), is your suggestion to have this in ID references as >>> well? (that would at least be consistent, and consistency is good) >>> >> >> Internet Draft references are styled after RFC references, which do not >> include a specific day of publication. I think email is a very different >> beast, and having a date specified helps the reader find the correct >> message. We're trying to being consistent in like-to-like things. >> >> I understand this may require a feature request for the next xml2rfc. > > Actually, what's *more* helpful to the reader would be an archive URL > (and potentially the mid). I'm not sure if you and I are thinking the same thing when it comes to an archive URL. I think of services like perma.cc. Could you explain further what you're thinking here? > > That said, is there any proposal to use the day in month in other > references as well? For instance, W3C specs do have it in their > boilerplate, so it's not clear why we wouldn't include that as well... > > At this point in time, no, we don't have a proposal for that. To be honest, I need to research a bit more of the history as to why we don't include the full date. The only RFCs that use the full date are April 1 RFCs. -Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:16:27 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC03B129A9C for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:16:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ctm-utVIAGYx for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:16:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22DBB12EAA9 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:16:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 987DDB80D8E; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:16:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95AFCB80D8C for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:16:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yDecyZm3g-8J for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:16:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5854B80D8B for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:16:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B411F1CA523 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:16:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AJBiv5OWzOrV for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:16:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8A7E21CA51F for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:16:09 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> <030DC553-3338-476F-A077-529F0193BEF1@gmail.com> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: <5aa0cab7-d5cc-a8e0-1b1e-465067d5fa13@rfc-editor.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:16:21 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <030DC553-3338-476F-A077-529F0193BEF1@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" T24gNi8xNS8xNyAxMTozOCBBTSwgQm9iIEhpbmRlbiB3cm90ZToKPiAKPj4gT24gSnVuIDE1LCAy MDE3LCBhdCAxOjM3IEFNLCBKdWxpYW4gUmVzY2hrZSA8anVsaWFuLnJlc2Noa2VAZ214LmRlPiB3 cm90ZToKPj4KPj4gT24gMjAxNy0wNi0xNSAwMjowMywgQnJpYW4gRSBDYXJwZW50ZXIgd3JvdGU6 Cj4+PiAuLi4KPj4+IFRoaXMgdHJpZ2dlcnMgb25lIG9mIG15IGhvYmJ5LWhvcnNlcywgSSdtIGFm cmFpZC4KPj4+IElmIEkgcmVmZXIgdG8gYW4gSS1EIGJlY2F1c2UgaXQncyB1c2VmdWwgcmVhZGlu ZyBidXQgbm90IHlldCBwdWJsaXNoZWQsIEknbSBoYXBweSB3aXRoIGl0IGJlaW5nIHRhZ2dlZCBh cyAiV29yayBpbiBwcm9ncmVzcyIuIEEgc21hcnQgcmVhZGVyIG1heSBldmVuIGhhdmUgdGhlIGlk ZWEgdG8gbG9vayBmb3IgYSBjb3JyZXNwb25kaW5nIFJGQy4KPj4+IElmIEkgcmVmZXIgdG8gYW4g SS1EIGJlY2F1c2UgaXQgaGFzIGhpc3RvcmljYWwgdmFsdWUsIEkgd291bGQgcHJlZmVyIGl0IHRv IGJlIHRhZ2dlZCBhcyAiVW5wdWJsaXNoZWQgZHJhZnQiIGFuZCBoYXZlIGFuIGV4YWN0IHZlcnNp b24gbnVtYmVyIChhbmQgZGF0ZSkuIENhbGxpbmcgaXQgIldvcmsgaW4gcHJvZ3Jlc3MiIGlzIGVp dGhlciBpbmFwcHJvcHJpYXRlIG9yIHNpbXBseSB1bnRydWUuCj4+PiBUb2RheSB3ZSBoYXZlIG5v IG1ldGFkYXRhIHRvIHNlcGFyYXRlIHRoZSB0d28gY2FzZXMuCj4+PiAuLi4KPj4KPj4gKzEKPj4K PiAKPiBJIHRlbmQgdG8gYWdyZWUgYXMgd2VsbC4gIFRob3VnaCBJIGFtIG5vdCBzdXJlIOKAnHVu cHVibGlzaGVkIGRyYWZ04oCdIGlzIGV4YWN0bHkgcmlnaHQgc2luY2UgdGhlIGRyYWZ0IGlzIGF2 YWlsYWJsZSBvbmxpbmUuICBXZSB0cmVhdCBJbnRlcm5ldCBEcmFmdHMgYXMgdGVtcG9yYXJ5LCBh bmQgYXQgdGhlIHNhbWUgdGltZSBwZXJtYW5lbnQuICBTdGFydGluZyB0byBzZWVtIG1vcmUgbGlr ZSB0aGUgbGF0ZXIuCj4gCj4gV2h5IGRvbuKAmXQgd2UgaW5jbHVkZSBhIGxpbmsgdG8gdGhlIElu dGVybmV0IERyYWZ0IGluIHRoZSByZWZlcmVuY2UgbGlrZSB3ZSBkbyBmb3IgUkZDcz8KPiAKPgoK SGlzdG9yaWNhbGx5LCBpdCdzIHRvIGVuZm9yY2UgdGhlIGZhY2UgdGhhdCBJLURzIGFyZSBub3Qg ZXF1YWwgdG8gUkZDcywKYW5kIGJlY2F1c2UgSS1EIFVSTHMgd2VyZSBlcGhlbWVyYWwgKHNpbmNl IEktRHMgd291bGQgZGlzYXBwZWFyIGFmdGVyCnNpeCBtb250aHMpLiBUaGUgbGF0dGVyIGlzIG5v IGxvbmdlciB0cnVlLiBIb3cgZG8geW91IGZlZWwgYWJvdXQgdGhlIGZvcm1lcj8KCi1IZWF0aGVy Cl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCnJmYy1pbnRl cmVzdCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKcmZjLWludGVyZXN0QHJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3 LnJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vcmZjLWludGVyZXN0Cg== From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:19:16 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C653129B48 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:19:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YG2yw2gky7vR for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:19:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F4A0129A9C for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:19:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E992FB80E0A; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:18:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6861B80E09 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:18:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bwvwRLH9IyxI for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:18:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 863B0B80E08 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:18:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 970E11CA534 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:18:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IJNZxuAR43_r for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:18:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6E4C91CA52A for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:18:58 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:19:10 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" T24gNi8xNC8xNyA1OjAzIFBNLCBCcmlhbiBFIENhcnBlbnRlciB3cm90ZToKPiBPbiAxNC8wNi8y MDE3IDIwOjM3LCBDYXJzdGVuIEJvcm1hbm4gd3JvdGU6Cj4+IE9uIEp1biAxMywgMjAxNywgYXQg MjM6MDIsIEhlYXRoZXIgRmxhbmFnYW4gKFJGQyBTZXJpZXMgRWRpdG9yKSA8cnNlQHJmYy1lZGl0 b3Iub3JnPiB3cm90ZToKPj4+Cj4+PiBJIGNhbiBzZWUgYSBzaXR1YXRpb24sIGluIGEgcHVyZWx5 IGhpc3RvcmljIGNvbnRleHQsIHdoZXJlIHRoaXMgbWlnaHQgYmUKPj4+IHVubmVjZXNzYXJ5LiAK Pj4KPj4gKENldGVydW0gY2Vuc2VvOikKPj4KPj4gSSBiZWxpZXZlIGl0IHdvdWxkIGJlIGEgZ29v ZCB0aGluZyB0byBjbGVhcmx5IGlkZW50aWZ5IOKAnGhpc3RvcmljYWzigJ0oKikgcmVmZXJlbmNl cyAoYXMgaW46IGhlcmUgeW91IGNhbiBmaW5kIG91dCBob3cgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBjYW1lIHRv IGJlIHRoZSB3YXkgaXQgaXMpIGFzIGEgc2VwYXJhdGUgY2xhc3MgZnJvbSBvdGhlciDigJxpbmZv cm1hdGl2ZeKAnSAoYXMgaW46IGhlcmUgaXMgbW9yZSBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiB0aGF0IGhlbHBzIGlu IHByb2Nlc3NpbmcgdGhlIHRlY2huaWNhbCBjb250ZW50IG9mIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQpIG9uZXMu Cj4+Cj4+IFRoZSBydWxlIGJlaW5nIGRpc2N1c3NlZCB3b3VsZCB0aGVuIGFwcGx5IHRvIGluZm9y bWF0aXZlLCBub3QgdG8gaGlzdG9yaWNhbCwgcmVmZXJlbmNlcy4KPiAKPiBUaGlzIHRyaWdnZXJz IG9uZSBvZiBteSBob2JieS1ob3JzZXMsIEknbSBhZnJhaWQuCj4gCj4gSWYgSSByZWZlciB0byBh biBJLUQgYmVjYXVzZSBpdCdzIHVzZWZ1bCByZWFkaW5nIGJ1dCBub3QgeWV0IHB1Ymxpc2hlZCwg SSdtIGhhcHB5IHdpdGggaXQgYmVpbmcgdGFnZ2VkIGFzICJXb3JrIGluIHByb2dyZXNzIi4gQSBz bWFydCByZWFkZXIgbWF5IGV2ZW4gaGF2ZSB0aGUgaWRlYSB0byBsb29rIGZvciBhIGNvcnJlc3Bv bmRpbmcgUkZDLgo+IAo+IElmIEkgcmVmZXIgdG8gYW4gSS1EIGJlY2F1c2UgaXQgaGFzIGhpc3Rv cmljYWwgdmFsdWUsIEkgd291bGQgcHJlZmVyIGl0IHRvIGJlIHRhZ2dlZCBhcyAiVW5wdWJsaXNo ZWQgZHJhZnQiIGFuZCBoYXZlIGFuIGV4YWN0IHZlcnNpb24gbnVtYmVyIChhbmQgZGF0ZSkuIENh bGxpbmcgaXQgIldvcmsgaW4gcHJvZ3Jlc3MiIGlzIGVpdGhlciBpbmFwcHJvcHJpYXRlIG9yIHNp bXBseSB1bnRydWUuCj4gCj4gVG9kYXkgd2UgaGF2ZSBubyBtZXRhZGF0YSB0byBzZXBhcmF0ZSB0 aGUgdHdvIGNhc2VzLgo+IAoKV2hvIHdvdWxkIG1ha2UgdGhlIGNhbGwgYXMgdG8gd2hldGhlciBh biBJLUQgaXMgYSB3b3JrIGluIHByb2dyZXNzIG9yIGEKW3N0YWxlfGhpc3RvcmljfG92ZXJ0YWtl biBieSBldmVudHN8eW91ciBmYXZvcml0ZSB0ZXJtIGhlcmVdIEktRD8gSXQncwpub3QgYSBzaW1w bGUgY2FzZSBvZiB0aW1lLCBhbmQgdGhlIGF1dGhvciBvZiB0aGUgSS1EIGJlaW5nIHJlZmVyZW5j ZWQKbWlnaHQgaGF2ZSBhIGRpZmZlcmVuY2Ugb2Ygb3BpbmlvbiB0aGFuIHRoZSBhdXRob3IgZG9p bmcgdGhlIHJlZmVyZW5jaW5nLgoKLUhlYXRoZXIKX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KcmZjLWludGVyZXN0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApyZmMtaW50ZXJl c3RAcmZjLWVkaXRvci5vcmcKaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cucmZjLWVkaXRvci5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0 aW5mby9yZmMtaW50ZXJlc3QK From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:24:09 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8766126C22 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:24:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kiCAne9zgh9i for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:24:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E4B4129B48 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:24:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9420BB80E30; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:23:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4FC8B80157; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:23:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e8LJg1P9nEs5; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:23:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C181B80E30; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:23:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.75.184]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M9NIY-1dWMJg0Dvi-00Ch2U; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:24:02 +0200 To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <95fdafee-d05c-ab6a-0e15-fc6780f0f909@gmx.de> <6b70c6d8-4b82-6198-69a8-89a8fb14b77d@gmx.de> <60634b87-fe8a-1081-54e2-db0636efe4d1@rfc-editor.org> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <7c0b6cff-4968-945a-68fb-b12e52ede60f@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:24:01 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <60634b87-fe8a-1081-54e2-db0636efe4d1@rfc-editor.org> Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:X5L5cJJeGNSK5oFsqXjTndmACMylDcSCrLQUHkv7Zz6oC3dN30T L0m8DRrL2Z54La9OeZTOgPKN3I8DK+2MUWhFoxwnUHGNwj74RMCuRdlBjXfkV0wGKHww72s 4kn97KSZefhMFn+sQDrIP0t5YN31N42OqbdUpcEQxOjTE3t4pliXsJVG4NFGntZwalexhc3 n67JXd5zFV8pd/1bUp2mw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:D5xKQWdqFvY=:wLxoZDcRmoaaFqq8xI5GIL sNwMOJOMnRbyHK+UzArtvag9VwEELezd45Nw6CWx0V+prTHdquutGXSL3K39u7Gl+zjlIxh4T qYdtEIcUCPYUY5vvAM8J1IEjvYaQEcIiLnV7KOvXkvAeL21AB/B4wpcBUpJTqTmeg+dc8l+rC Bw3Q3U1miur9ykNEIcZh21zSO+Me3CxhUYqmS0pvC9oWwgeIVw324r0XWdqJwy3IefYlnY99Y PkscjWH40QIBFxJWu3pZRCD1ycqGkk+dmI2NzJ++SY8Zx/aSj22RP04XlaUdX0gTn3bHLvWW7 WsfcN5Qb+7p9m2MQ2PISmOUOhYP25qiGX9BBFZjX+izJ/Tb1ZpogndE1vBVJQGiaL9IH8T+uf ujmIWX3U0SYaDQdLO3BL75fzmzlds/dTXIiP5jR1t/+1FVWIu4NID8iPm8+ZLuiWtBXckx4az PWpI9SytSniELAN/jjD9N3lmcUvPy1+tlATLVmWLaOI+w0ryquiSaqYaCEwZfEwlovXbS/QVi DGPJhtYDB+D53Jv6/m8mI7RQt+yq/fmDxzkIgIHw/FIggcTc8zPNkf3W+lWLpTz6WvnpqPOmo XizFwkbW0pVpb6mapcz1MPTwMVd8aBY1qzdfzO5QQlSpSFBgaihd78X4O0xCSr7CgAif494LG v8OsY8V3oI2XT370XtAb3yninO4RkCtTxGM3r/LjCsw/TN48jBVzL5senunfSg1YgE+2+GVMl FC/49BTc3aKirC0zvrGdMHmXBcDdUFfjCrP2lRxLX7XqzbuCUH0etSmOFHuonDRATI0QpkShF 7ilT5x8 Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing STDs and BCPs X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 2017-06-16 20:06, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > ... >> This creates a special case for these entries, which I believe is a >> bad thing. > > I don't think it is a special case, per se. I think this is the case of > how to handle sub-series. They are a slightly different beast than just > straight RFCs. > ... In the optimal case, we can define something that is not restricted to IETF document series... >>>> (3) What if the spec prose actually wants to refer to one of the >>>> documents in the document set? >>> >>> They they shouldn't refer to the subseries; they should just reference >>> the individual RFC. If they want to do both (reference the subseries and >>> later specifically reference an RFC within that subseries) then I think >>> we're going to have a discussion with the author to figure out what >>> exactly they are trying to do. Are they trying to point someone to >>> whatever the current standard or best practice is, or are they trying to >>> point to a snapshot in time? Both are perfectly reasonable things to do, >>> and we'd adjust the references accordingly. >> >> Which doesn't answer the case what to do when both is happening. >> Leaving this undefined until it happens is just asking for trouble. > > So, you're asking about when someone wants to refer to the current > documents in the subseries, AND refer to a specific RFC that happens to > be in the subseries at the time of publication? I don't see anything > preventing that, though it likely will result in a conversation between > the authors and RPC to make sure the intent is clear. Right now, it will fail because the anchor elements would be in conflict. Best regards, Julian _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:25:08 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6670612EA24 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:25:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nwIfGHaDzKEc for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:25:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91819126C22 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:25:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9E51B80E3E; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:24:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DF7DB80E3C; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:24:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QQpto9gCGGxW; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:24:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D179B80E3B; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:24:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.75.184]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M4TgW-1djGhF0gkG-00yjY1; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:25:01 +0200 To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <7f442b37-a7b6-cb7e-de8f-cf9acc6594cf@rfc-editor.org> <1a80f928-4de4-2273-a524-986cbcaa8fc9@rfc-editor.org> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <0e7e0be2-885a-8e9c-72c2-d06210a5a290@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:25:00 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1a80f928-4de4-2273-a524-986cbcaa8fc9@rfc-editor.org> Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:cbNEgqwekKZwi+lAdZ/y57DdF4CLnk7/dgnb3wrsXFc4QRrUh3J 1GU04rR5p0MfrEBT3j7tmO0HX7i5kgzB3z43b8xDc3O40X+GNxE20QecWUqo1ZgcvMoWF5k XdVSv1w91mERg+mtoHNpoyYkx9+LvefKjfnihca5OK+xMf7SGDli3hxfxev6K4iBmk0ZQ56 YjOsKaiUHtEYkUkl88xRw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:9o0y8ylNO80=:KkPhU/osAdT5wr8GJoVejv O5sM8PMA3E0lNStmw8voMyOTMAfUcGO3l07exR6dqzfkFye11zcSHfDyZTIRpTtqeftknUYrL dIJ0+FArtY1J7PTCoaMTPb6nv4WqSO765kCG+h7a/xDHsYjrfVAWWiZIoTCIQJHDUP/2JT/Sg rIV8mpFjxyzFJP6W4Cih7BpTRgjTRZGgf/4GQzhxr5PGnCbD5rTmWjPj81ohJjyO29ZD8YFd6 4+e7NB/X9oyf72mAJmJgsHbPPfpitVcJwOFaGRNyNmxsVJsBmMz8UxGgLVQFova7ZdHxXoJsM lBQIBk0n0t+AcNiTCoxXEglPcIrgHkiFNVINgn8iPY/c8XCcwOQbHflEJgIo2pG3Dx6OHqV3W cmB6bQXo+zcFlK5HD+ohw37p1LOItMgJCMH8G2zO9LIrEgdzVzskXlO38TGgHL6qBCmnryrqG jsY9U9Mrdq56/+vJa54nHjA/P5ywkoFIpLze4Jd6CYsYwlOcJ/fx4MpdQFkzREHr1TbpNriqW JEV2rLdz51a5VyHtq4fxikzqgJzraMjvdWUYGgWG+dH8h61uzV+QC7Xq+CEqPsj9LIdZ0lqdo 44YTkUeKzYgomKD0QhfbT32TBJl8Y1HCUJJct7CxBfJOxT0TcX/lpiMh72PUCEwdh0udlIx1B d+cCdpbhuDUdP01sdp2GsHq1YU5qelsUt1oIt+/fdY5hzpIxvrFuJow8zV25LzrRTaFyCWLzT ZyYviOlRlOCYQwiUAlp+VId+M5P5BLc5NWCpDs/IZYjUhRDwN3X2U3J89R3IxygoVPLbLVou+ VWv4TMR Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing RFCs X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 2017-06-16 20:07, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > ... >>> We can't use submissionType because it's not allowed in ? >> >> Correct. > > Can we change the vocabulary to allow that? What would that break? > ... I don't think anything would break. It just needs to be added. Best regards, Julian _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:31:19 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DEF7129442 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:31:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z10C_jDyVcCI for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:31:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7EFA126C89 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:31:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7888AB80E6C; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:31:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9952B80E6C; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:31:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aOmrcN_kk8LF; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:31:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24159B80E6B; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.75.184]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MO7Ca-1dPFwL0LJc-005b37; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:31:13 +0200 To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <0211abc1-06ce-0f4c-ea8b-94f3645cc582@rfc-editor.org> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <69365c6a-b763-519d-34ad-95c0dda6eec3@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:31:12 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:s6pdZcpGdeLcZCVNYUsoE12VnW0c8x318m5rVj4fpM0W39k36IC ZC49mkOFNLsEWIJ8+HVTskgZr7zQl1Bnecp4Mh4zA72q9ZOGTkxXpF2X3LBVwSPOHwtVgm0 jLi8XN5ghr6LlxhbfbPrVrZuXI4rxSYPzzzfMHg+S5TGcNQ+VQJzwjkrBzZCetufjP49dS0 Rx7it7Qtv6Bev8SHQbcnA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:0CE72MHPS3g=:Zdcq/FDEc0k2Cb8eGPPvEo hYxlTR3WBE7I5DMAv69vjk7LM9aDQtpfd8H5Cq5OahsP6c7zW3LfKrC2VH7DyE+afPC6itBzd m21XAweZ+KCEOEErDJBCrEXrejClcX622T0xt5Cu+rzgGjI2vkj2NFvvYPoGHnI6veGBqn5XH iz2VkDgjQqaM5ztBhR/1dZ3WKdp5h7be8/cTXDLA7ircxZ1i3a2LdhDWC/w+RbWtinHlKqtXu oDTaLpl9lPtlZGsYGu9vHOoISef3FVEpivy9jQ/51atWKNAKbUUQ9PyEPeiNczGdPkvVAv50L yFBRUlmG3urjFWfMa4C9vOYblKslKGkB0m/QlqGaJRGIOVE/ulgzZ2mf7invDuPtsKpabcmsP IA6daYqaisRKcgCv/Y7lk4EVP616nGx6TzGR51/S4tpecdPHwAY4WAKYdQu+g9rXUQ/ibBjIo ECPxL9tp5SqOIE8L3yggwG4nfubzoyT7vRGdLSPpUKUMXanDisMTW5Q82FgKuq3HKijoXaFV5 Vnr6b3nVR7Nt/XtQhd/LGshhK9faH2tCGVnK46fMXfUvy2W3hndAa2xX4bnC9zsFT8fx6Bzs1 +VzzV8IVvzfl2dyJe39qOMvKS8Ox91+RJAeMQ3fgK7wwWvnEHzXeLz2pv/qMWMpUWr/6hlO6D +ulz4Qet9yX8Bvb4HEC/K1TJzPj8uB3ZDvNtaJp5vKfJlzg/yDqW0nE1tOnKLP9fn0JLM4M2u r0r6tlQcKRVRG+J5447iAgPGOS/dB4Qb79JMYtAlX7Ei49wmaKiUyfia2JJ+LPHgtrhmghf8o Cz7lzPo Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Emails X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 2017-06-16 20:11, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > ... > I'm not sure if you and I are thinking the same thing when it comes to > an archive URL. I think of services like perma.cc. Could you explain > further what you're thinking here? > ... Mailing list archives that assign stable URIs to mails. Example: http://www.w3.org/mid/42532309-F4FA-4007-8639-04B90743DFFE@mnot.net >> That said, is there any proposal to use the day in month in other >> references as well? For instance, W3C specs do have it in their >> boilerplate, so it's not clear why we wouldn't include that as well... >> >> > > At this point in time, no, we don't have a proposal for that. To be > honest, I need to research a bit more of the history as to why we don't > include the full date. The only RFCs that use the full date are April 1 > RFCs. Interesting. xml2rfc is unlikely to produce this correctly, unless it knows how to identify an April 1st RFC... Best regards, Julian _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:33:22 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0ECA12F274 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:33:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FvlXX3Ew0xiP for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:33:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44034126C89 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:33:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC6E3B80E75; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:33:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F9D8B80E75; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:33:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GiG4mOh2CE5R; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:33:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E65AB80E74; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:33:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.75.184]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LuwiT-1dmmWw3lc9-0103vy; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:33:16 +0200 To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:33:14 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:VlnDGsnZf6FLlL4kCyLapjwLW9bLpYCbkNn4AC3R3z3crCdR7Ej Sl6VY3pcOV6fi4m9SIVEpAPhn7Yd+0zuECCGvcLe2/WXb3ZnUge3lBApiOsqyKVrjuhKvvI 0tt3KYFskzbfwVblAWgVO94Np7AWBNX4C95aij76HsDfaIYsGb0UgjTlTxY+s4633sg3iAn kOt50K1efI03afHxbyAAA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:jgykLONb0dQ=:bnyoxC/VB5y5MjR5g01UGH vFmyYB+GJ3mARgeUithJ4lFyM9CMoqs99bCD/bw8zEwBoAXAhrpofPOOxDf16GH+oj61J/WEp XQfRsClQz4AX+ak43+VcNKdf74S9/HR89KaMMTavvKjhHEm+d7l3kzUm0pIRx8iGIzMLPPGs3 +shXmdIQ3wqXULKu3P/02ALYX04Gb0BISPIjvvyT5zh/vB/OLI/83CJ7epAnV2vBmideDQymN bNNWr9BEIBYATYY/4vK9QAMz7Kgjtoqdf3Otnm/17J59zGDnvjnNZTwZdHxuQCHY3tw6lBe95 Bo7SRydBv8+LIWlpwy44hH5jmb0L3rg15NgYT1iu6Yf8zRR7sBrz76i+SlNy2zzLVlJElAeJY 4RhzoTmJ16qquA7LOaQHv0TFmyn5ZVW8jBAB5bXxKM0nmaYZcg95X0oz5M3TFDSTpGI8slfQ0 ycwV5sQKkkXmZkYci7586SixJjmqkVIE1hPh8K3C8PD0j9s1Zy6cU+vs92qIW26mDJXWyUbx+ GRIoOtkdQDXdHCX+WfPS5iAkFAwLwqns4/e/pIjiWOivyGz2C2tXTeb1ao1aNQHC9rIIGc8nm Qt3KSxtrNFqlajS1O3acZVVFntxAre4uprXlYhybpnUNJjLMxGIFcvV55dmWayheLYZ+bVqQG ww0ZBJBRDuYjkcHJrBKLxhcvDIaaNTCn55z+AORoqB63kikKqsgvjF4DoGFpdp8ympOfs5Utv 7m/dmJj0bL0gswkHbmzyCbb0Ld+FCuXbvJ5oZsA/4LlfC+F1KHyarGXkBq1gIAK/1ItpUhtWe 7UnrK2M Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 2017-06-16 20:19, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > ... > Who would make the call as to whether an I-D is a work in progress or a > [stale|historic|overtaken by events|your favorite term here] I-D? It's > not a simple case of time, and the author of the I-D being referenced > might have a difference of opinion than the author doing the referencing. > ... There'll be edge cases, right. But if an ID hasn't been updated in years, it's likely abandoned, right? _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:41:06 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0BC0128A32 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:41:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=augustcellars.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ggJtbnmi01zb for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:40:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5C1A1200C1 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:40:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69A98B80EB0; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:40:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CB2CB80EAE; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:40:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=augustcellars.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1dJlvtECE610; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:40:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail4.augustcellars.com (augustcellars.com [50.45.239.150]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB16DB80EAD; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:40:40 -0700 (PDT) Content-Language: en-us DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=augustcellars.com; s=winery; c=simple/simple; t=1497638448; h=from:subject:to:date:message-id; bh=jG7xoFAXRHgGXj0/KzBY7YNFly+5Bp/pZMZWBA4oEyc=; b=FVjqoF+HrRHLg5KHn2nvo0Kei+uxXdWvK/xa8ZjqX82Ax55ysxye6M2nSid++SclFzX6EeeAzA3 cheHcoFb1fuSA6EMBIpxBvIjmB79ZbAerwDfmaV09bYL/t2SgXmaarU9jlpzwHdVpmCDEGgAgMQAv 7FragGXpFSNICIIkAMXiBX7AeSHN9jV7wDZKw3YUwxs4gE8AJ3ZMtHC89eK4Z75HN7nluCKHZ7FSS NZztiof97YToz0IN7nVq6rf6DzU95O+4NLfC88RHLICSpgbQnx1w6UJy89tf+EgH5RkXlvEpepHBB A3fTJWzp+qX7dohhZAQh1wfR9gA7TFnbZ/oQ== Received: from mail2.augustcellars.com (192.168.1.201) by mail4.augustcellars.com (192.168.1.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:40:47 -0700 Received: from Hebrews (24.21.96.37) by mail2.augustcellars.com (192.168.0.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:40:46 -0700 From: Jim Schaad To: "'Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)'" , References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:40:44 -0700 Message-ID: <000001d2e6d0$11d60370$35820a50$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQJyL2KBMgKeorNN77s/30z4UzEkWAJHU0twAjQPGnQBoaw/IQIFb40AA4D5RtwCt8bDygG6527foGiP/XA= X-Originating-IP: [24.21.96.37] Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" CgotLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQpGcm9tOiByZmMtaW50ZXJlc3QgW21haWx0bzpy ZmMtaW50ZXJlc3QtYm91bmNlc0ByZmMtZWRpdG9yLm9yZ10gT24gQmVoYWxmIE9mIEhlYXRoZXIg RmxhbmFnYW4gKFJGQyBTZXJpZXMgRWRpdG9yKQpTZW50OiBGcmlkYXksIEp1bmUgMTYsIDIwMTcg MTE6MTkgQU0KVG86IHJmYy1pbnRlcmVzdEByZmMtZWRpdG9yLm9yZwpTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW3Jm Yy1pXSBSZWZlcmVuY2luZyBJbnRlcm5ldCBEcmFmdHMKCk9uIDYvMTQvMTcgNTowMyBQTSwgQnJp YW4gRSBDYXJwZW50ZXIgd3JvdGU6Cj4gT24gMTQvMDYvMjAxNyAyMDozNywgQ2Fyc3RlbiBCb3Jt YW5uIHdyb3RlOgo+PiBPbiBKdW4gMTMsIDIwMTcsIGF0IDIzOjAyLCBIZWF0aGVyIEZsYW5hZ2Fu IChSRkMgU2VyaWVzIEVkaXRvcikgPHJzZUByZmMtZWRpdG9yLm9yZz4gd3JvdGU6Cj4+Pgo+Pj4g SSBjYW4gc2VlIGEgc2l0dWF0aW9uLCBpbiBhIHB1cmVseSBoaXN0b3JpYyBjb250ZXh0LCB3aGVy ZSB0aGlzIAo+Pj4gbWlnaHQgYmUgdW5uZWNlc3NhcnkuCj4+Cj4+IChDZXRlcnVtIGNlbnNlbzop Cj4+Cj4+IEkgYmVsaWV2ZSBpdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBhIGdvb2QgdGhpbmcgdG8gY2xlYXJseSBpZGVu dGlmeSDigJxoaXN0b3JpY2Fs4oCdKCopIHJlZmVyZW5jZXMgKGFzIGluOiBoZXJlIHlvdSBjYW4g ZmluZCBvdXQgaG93IHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgY2FtZSB0byBiZSB0aGUgd2F5IGl0IGlzKSBhcyBh IHNlcGFyYXRlIGNsYXNzIGZyb20gb3RoZXIg4oCcaW5mb3JtYXRpdmXigJ0gKGFzIGluOiBoZXJl IGlzIG1vcmUgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gdGhhdCBoZWxwcyBpbiBwcm9jZXNzaW5nIHRoZSB0ZWNobmlj YWwgY29udGVudCBvZiB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50KSBvbmVzLgo+Pgo+PiBUaGUgcnVsZSBiZWluZyBk aXNjdXNzZWQgd291bGQgdGhlbiBhcHBseSB0byBpbmZvcm1hdGl2ZSwgbm90IHRvIGhpc3Rvcmlj YWwsIHJlZmVyZW5jZXMuCj4gCj4gVGhpcyB0cmlnZ2VycyBvbmUgb2YgbXkgaG9iYnktaG9yc2Vz LCBJJ20gYWZyYWlkLgo+IAo+IElmIEkgcmVmZXIgdG8gYW4gSS1EIGJlY2F1c2UgaXQncyB1c2Vm dWwgcmVhZGluZyBidXQgbm90IHlldCBwdWJsaXNoZWQsIEknbSBoYXBweSB3aXRoIGl0IGJlaW5n IHRhZ2dlZCBhcyAiV29yayBpbiBwcm9ncmVzcyIuIEEgc21hcnQgcmVhZGVyIG1heSBldmVuIGhh dmUgdGhlIGlkZWEgdG8gbG9vayBmb3IgYSBjb3JyZXNwb25kaW5nIFJGQy4KPiAKPiBJZiBJIHJl ZmVyIHRvIGFuIEktRCBiZWNhdXNlIGl0IGhhcyBoaXN0b3JpY2FsIHZhbHVlLCBJIHdvdWxkIHBy ZWZlciBpdCB0byBiZSB0YWdnZWQgYXMgIlVucHVibGlzaGVkIGRyYWZ0IiBhbmQgaGF2ZSBhbiBl eGFjdCB2ZXJzaW9uIG51bWJlciAoYW5kIGRhdGUpLiBDYWxsaW5nIGl0ICJXb3JrIGluIHByb2dy ZXNzIiBpcyBlaXRoZXIgaW5hcHByb3ByaWF0ZSBvciBzaW1wbHkgdW50cnVlLgo+IAo+IFRvZGF5 IHdlIGhhdmUgbm8gbWV0YWRhdGEgdG8gc2VwYXJhdGUgdGhlIHR3byBjYXNlcy4KPiAKCldobyB3 b3VsZCBtYWtlIHRoZSBjYWxsIGFzIHRvIHdoZXRoZXIgYW4gSS1EIGlzIGEgd29yayBpbiBwcm9n cmVzcyBvciBhIFtzdGFsZXxoaXN0b3JpY3xvdmVydGFrZW4gYnkgZXZlbnRzfHlvdXIgZmF2b3Jp dGUgdGVybSBoZXJlXSBJLUQ/IEl0J3Mgbm90IGEgc2ltcGxlIGNhc2Ugb2YgdGltZSwgYW5kIHRo ZSBhdXRob3Igb2YgdGhlIEktRCBiZWluZyByZWZlcmVuY2VkIG1pZ2h0IGhhdmUgYSBkaWZmZXJl bmNlIG9mIG9waW5pb24gdGhhbiB0aGUgYXV0aG9yIGRvaW5nIHRoZSByZWZlcmVuY2luZy4KCltK TFNdIEhvd2V2ZXIsIHRoZXJlIGFyZSBzb21lIGVhc3kgY2FzZXMuICBGb3IgZXhhbXBsZSBhbnkg ZG9jdW1lbnQgd2hpY2ggaGFzIGhhZCBhIHJlcGxhY2VtZW50IGRvY3VtZW50IGlzIGRlZmluaXRl bHkgbm8gbG9uZ2VyIGEgV0lQLgoKSmltCgoKLUhlYXRoZXIKX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KcmZjLWludGVyZXN0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApyZmMt aW50ZXJlc3RAcmZjLWVkaXRvci5vcmcKaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cucmZjLWVkaXRvci5vcmcvbWFpbG1h bi9saXN0aW5mby9yZmMtaW50ZXJlc3QKCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCnJmYy1pbnRlcmVzdCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKcmZjLWludGVyZXN0QHJm Yy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8v cmZjLWludGVyZXN0Cg== From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:43:04 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFE2C12EC0E for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:43:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.892 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.892 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=comcast.net Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NMiVIdtbGvre for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:43:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEDE41200C1 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:43:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEEEBB80EC8; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:42:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E1E9B80EC8 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:42:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=comcast.net Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1ABXapP9opbw for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:42:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from resqmta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:36]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40F1AB80EC7 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:42:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from resomta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.100]) by resqmta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id LwCZd9VYjscBPLwCvdIYDG; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 18:42:57 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20161114; t=1497638577; bh=FFc2uBYbGdlT/yg2X1GMF8eWtK/DSzHrTDPzgSsCHcU=; h=Received:Received:Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=G7RukQGc8m3OoPOkqWeJFRn8ZizBfoKq8uki1JV5aYkMGhHOZeSq1v7Ps5hYpaQ6e e801H/jQIZvtGX20bVp72dd4WFDLRnmuPa/WcWQDbewlquB6RI5v82kbhSzifvqATR h04gcwXuKAyVTy3D0y0151mzTnRxgzU45O5Ch6kDJRFarDwxB7xmVnkz+cUrpVyu22 R4rpD7pG1Esmj6t6Ivu0si3OKjc4cD0v+Yqkp6SW+fNaLe1vCL4UPxvWFSkeSbeF0W TwkvZjotVLUV2z8LMGlLXyoLJt7zE1PuGCJzhoVlAg2ICAK+VxEnYVyo3cNgdgds3j d6Y8PaIwNcLjA== Received: from [192.168.1.110] ([24.62.227.142]) by resomta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id LwCudnG3XUflxLwCud0Jhv; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 18:42:57 +0000 To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> From: Paul Kyzivat Message-ID: Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:42:56 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfGVu8MP3T9ABkrvcirOgMxm7yCIrhYXJyBbzFdFeAVi8sWKtLhpot55ZxP6uwAINq6WkDDHLpB+VYN03/qRIInQ0X8qCY+Z/Yv9GE2nsnib+TpvCQvk8 RXEp6zOf/xD2dSIU1re6hh+RJwN4GeaZIn+xx22maQ3xTbKEMebUD2h2AqboZtpvgv2K5lG8pPygOw== Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 6/16/17 2:33 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2017-06-16 20:19, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >> ... >> Who would make the call as to whether an I-D is a work in progress or a >> [stale|historic|overtaken by events|your favorite term here] I-D? It's >> not a simple case of time, and the author of the I-D being referenced >> might have a difference of opinion than the author doing the referencing. >> ... > > There'll be edge cases, right. But if an ID hasn't been updated in > years, it's likely abandoned, right? Isn't it sufficient to define that an ID that is the most recent version and hasn't expired is a work in progress, and that others are historic? Thanks, Paul _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:43:07 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FD2B128A32 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:43:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jtNS8_E1INwY for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:43:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB5A91200C1 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:43:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D829EB80ED2; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:42:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAC3AB80ED2 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:42:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NjJDERhB9uu2 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:42:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BDE8B80ECF for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:42:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35AE81C68BC; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:42:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o0pyFdRZM4Jj; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:42:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F3AA51C6B8C; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:42:50 -0700 (PDT) To: Julian Reschke , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: <6208edfc-8fd2-9b81-7264-8599163154df@rfc-editor.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:43:02 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 6/16/17 11:33 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2017-06-16 20:19, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >> ... >> Who would make the call as to whether an I-D is a work in progress or a >> [stale|historic|overtaken by events|your favorite term here] I-D? It's >> not a simple case of time, and the author of the I-D being referenced >> might have a difference of opinion than the author doing the >> referencing. >> ... > > There'll be edge cases, right. But if an ID hasn't been updated in > years, it's likely abandoned, right? > Almost certainly. But I think this whole discussion is a bit of an edge case in and of itself. It's rare that authors point to draft that old in current docs. I'm not saying it isn't done, but it is rare. So, if we're going to add terms here, we may as well consider the whole scenario. -Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 11:54:19 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81D8912EBAE for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:54:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pFWVwYLNZSFL for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:54:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1812C127863 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:54:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1617B8010F; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:53:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4A0AB8010F for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:53:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c3Km1B8Wnj2q for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:53:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17995B800E6 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:53:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A1101CA533; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:53:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aFnYelhJiT43; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:53:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EC30F1CA532; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:53:54 -0700 (PDT) To: Julian Reschke , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <95fdafee-d05c-ab6a-0e15-fc6780f0f909@gmx.de> <6b70c6d8-4b82-6198-69a8-89a8fb14b77d@gmx.de> <60634b87-fe8a-1081-54e2-db0636efe4d1@rfc-editor.org> <7c0b6cff-4968-945a-68fb-b12e52ede60f@gmx.de> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 11:54:06 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7c0b6cff-4968-945a-68fb-b12e52ede60f@gmx.de> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing STDs and BCPs X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 6/16/17 11:24 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2017-06-16 20:06, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >> ... >>> This creates a special case for these entries, which I believe is a >>> bad thing. >> >> I don't think it is a special case, per se. I think this is the case of >> how to handle sub-series. They are a slightly different beast than just >> straight RFCs. >> ... > > In the optimal case, we can define something that is not restricted to > IETF document series... > >>>>> (3) What if the spec prose actually wants to refer to one of the >>>>> documents in the document set? >>>> >>>> They they shouldn't refer to the subseries; they should just reference >>>> the individual RFC. If they want to do both (reference the >>>> subseries and >>>> later specifically reference an RFC within that subseries) then I >>>> think >>>> we're going to have a discussion with the author to figure out what >>>> exactly they are trying to do. Are they trying to point someone to >>>> whatever the current standard or best practice is, or are they >>>> trying to >>>> point to a snapshot in time? Both are perfectly reasonable things >>>> to do, >>>> and we'd adjust the references accordingly. >>> >>> Which doesn't answer the case what to do when both is happening. >>> Leaving this undefined until it happens is just asking for trouble. >> >> So, you're asking about when someone wants to refer to the current >> documents in the subseries, AND refer to a specific RFC that happens to >> be in the subseries at the time of publication? I don't see anything >> preventing that, though it likely will result in a conversation between >> the authors and RPC to make sure the intent is clear. > > Right now, it will fail because the anchor elements would be in conflict. How? The anchor element can (should!) be unique, differentiating between a reference to STD### versus a reference to RFC####. (I hate that feeling that I must be missing something obvious.) -Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 12:08:10 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67A5113152E for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:08:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sEVlao0CQskR for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:08:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A851112EBAE for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:08:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DAF2B80C67; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:07:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84AB7B80C67; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:07:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8EEHYqaHuUJW; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:07:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B111B80C65; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:07:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v5GJ7ru8025878; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 21:07:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from client-0143.vpn.uni-bremen.de (client-0143.vpn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.107.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3wq8yd2ygkzDJwn; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 21:07:53 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <69365c6a-b763-519d-34ad-95c0dda6eec3@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 21:07:52 +0200 X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 519332872.053746-b4adff8c7e735ac3dbbb38947a436f58 Message-Id: <371D996C-069D-4E8C-9294-0918254C36D0@tzi.org> References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <0211abc1-06ce-0f4c-ea8b-94f3645cc582@rfc-editor.org> <69365c6a-b763-519d-34ad-95c0dda6eec3@gmx.de> To: Julian Reschke X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Emails X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org, "Heather Flanagan \(RFC Series Editor\)" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" T24gSnVuIDE2LCAyMDE3LCBhdCAyMDozMSwgSnVsaWFuIFJlc2Noa2UgPGp1bGlhbi5yZXNjaGtl QGdteC5kZT4gd3JvdGU6Cj4gCj4gTWFpbGluZyBsaXN0IGFyY2hpdmVzIHRoYXQgYXNzaWduIHN0 YWJsZSBVUklzIHRvIG1haWxzLiBFeGFtcGxlOiBodHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy9taWQvNDI1MzIz MDktRjRGQS00MDA3LTg2MzktMDRCOTA3NDNERkZFQG1ub3QubmV0CgooT3IgYW55IElFVEYgbWFp bGluZyBsaXN0LCBlLmcuOgpodHRwczovL21haWxhcmNoaXZlLmlldGYub3JnL2FyY2gvbXNnL3ht bDJyZmMvNnBRcl9aV1p0NDJ3Nlc5VURPUzJXVFRNa1NvCikKCkdyw7zDn2UsIENhcnN0ZW4KCl9f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCnJmYy1pbnRlcmVz dCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKcmZjLWludGVyZXN0QHJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnJm Yy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vcmZjLWludGVyZXN0Cg== From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 12:13:08 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CB8D13152E for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:13:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8fqnL4EvtMr3 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:13:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 412B012EAF9 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:13:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A601AB80C83; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:12:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AE78B80C83 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:12:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M_Qt3KuCimRp for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:12:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C5E2B80C7E for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:12:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 874C71CA387 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:12:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PQbItAJcGHRR for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:12:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5D7F21C52E7 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:12:49 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: <97bf81f3-3cd0-cb17-750b-a12910e97413@rfc-editor.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:13:01 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 6/16/17 11:42 AM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > On 6/16/17 2:33 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> On 2017-06-16 20:19, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >>> ... >>> Who would make the call as to whether an I-D is a work in progress or a >>> [stale|historic|overtaken by events|your favorite term here] I-D? It's >>> not a simple case of time, and the author of the I-D being referenced >>> might have a difference of opinion than the author doing the >>> referencing. >>> ... >> >> There'll be edge cases, right. But if an ID hasn't been updated in >> years, it's likely abandoned, right? > > Isn't it sufficient to define that an ID that is the most recent version > and hasn't expired is a work in progress, and that others are historic? > I don't think it's quite that tidy. For example, there are drafts that are expired but which are in one of the stream manager's queue for consideration (e.g., https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-young-entity-category/). There's also a certain consideration about how useful it is to make this distinction when someone reads the RFC referencing these I-Ds in a year; all the I-Ds may be historic, or may be revised, or may be replaced, or a mix of all the above. Unless the author of the RFC doing the referencing is careful to explain the context in which he or she is referencing the I-D (which they should do regardless) I'm not sure we're helping the reader with an "the I-D being referenced was older than six months at the time this RFC was published". -Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 12:38:04 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DE75131833 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:38:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.891 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.891 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OiXMk04lTtzJ for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:38:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27AE3131618 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:38:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92E5FB80D2A; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:37:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B837FB80D2A; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:37:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W3eQmowgKdpn; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:37:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf0-x22f.google.com (mail-pf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22f]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1975FB80D29; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:37:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id 83so26637863pfr.0; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:37:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=Tyj3udFe/ZA/QlFDeFQqRrkQAf7rGktZuSMfdfGixhM=; b=K9OCwNx9jR7wmGkdiyL5qBK3CD0m2acIVz3MKpP0/vitO+CAgjsZANrMQ5pHGAqJKC aazJA9FFccVT1Bxt3/tAggrocm50P/VAqgXToXh+0KOq5l80dBRDO5u9JcD/+Jegzjuw ABPk9BsPZh16WjxAO/W4hguKm5E/hFYg0jBnNASK53NPMw12kILBb6lJ06vvc9qEOcM4 2E10UHTk/gk0hDDaSEA4dyr08pvJdyEH3f0n65YgggBjiFg/i82h+ogSAGZpBlHGpycg 5SD37Ht5mJVL3+L1aSlmtz4nv5NWjeFc9N+le8+vaL0K1OHucvxQr/M/g+wJcKafbVT7 YJnQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=Tyj3udFe/ZA/QlFDeFQqRrkQAf7rGktZuSMfdfGixhM=; b=NFKLcyyNNmdrY9WaEYjFKPoz7CSu4k3hxBYIhQPLdVHwXq7ATdPt/Ud/BjpgHL5jud BpYFPN0SDsIH2FNv1RWeAtQIWOUvOv4dhvwRYlJv3MCQcUTRVGyk1FECHYUuTpKCwMua KhkJVnFipN9V3dWed3t/fAtf2pXZulRenhg0E4otuqf5okvf/sc9kdIOXahxVWFykREZ hafaTI+PH6G6tgBF7hecvDSXhKQP2mdJVwia5xgeN38wD8duU396sXFkSEZSr7EnMnKB wvDdZX3Zf+YEkwbz//ZiFXrgshqCPA8uBXnxr71p8pxCOwEsx4x93wJdgRdTXVtaIDPT H72g== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOzb9gO1XNHPXzpE00E9K6JftiLV/lOlIyEVcqiRPO9Gd8WhTZ5s GoJT8gXSlZgoaqJZOHFX0g== X-Received: by 10.84.229.79 with SMTP id d15mr5655270pln.4.1497641878173; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:37:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.137] ([216.9.107.110]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h71sm6741420pfk.126.2017.06.16.12.37.54 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:37:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Hinden Message-Id: <2F061E95-0D7D-478C-8CCB-4B501F157F61@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:37:30 -0700 In-Reply-To: <5aa0cab7-d5cc-a8e0-1b1e-465067d5fa13@rfc-editor.org> To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> <030DC553-3338-476F-A077-529F0193BEF1@gmail.com> <5aa0cab7-d5cc-a8e0-1b1e-465067d5fa13@rfc-editor.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org, Bob Hinden Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0774388060360773228==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============0774388060360773228== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D5F9E228-356C-4DBC-AD45-B80243134DD9"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 --Apple-Mail=_D5F9E228-356C-4DBC-AD45-B80243134DD9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Heather, > On Jun 16, 2017, at 11:16 AM, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) = wrote: >=20 > On 6/15/17 11:38 AM, Bob Hinden wrote: >>=20 >>> On Jun 15, 2017, at 1:37 AM, Julian Reschke = wrote: >>>=20 >>> On 2017-06-15 02:03, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>>> ... >>>> This triggers one of my hobby-horses, I'm afraid. >>>> If I refer to an I-D because it's useful reading but not yet = published, I'm happy with it being tagged as "Work in progress". A smart = reader may even have the idea to look for a corresponding RFC. >>>> If I refer to an I-D because it has historical value, I would = prefer it to be tagged as "Unpublished draft" and have an exact version = number (and date). Calling it "Work in progress" is either inappropriate = or simply untrue. >>>> Today we have no metadata to separate the two cases. >>>> ... >>>=20 >>> +1 >>>=20 >>=20 >> I tend to agree as well. Though I am not sure =E2=80=9Cunpublished = draft=E2=80=9D is exactly right since the draft is available online. We = treat Internet Drafts as temporary, and at the same time permanent. = Starting to seem more like the later. >>=20 >> Why don=E2=80=99t we include a link to the Internet Draft in the = reference like we do for RFCs? >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > Historically, it's to enforce the face that I-Ds are not equal to = RFCs, > and because I-D URLs were ephemeral (since I-Ds would disappear after > six months). The latter is no longer true. How do you feel about the = former? Certainly I-Ds are not equal to RFCs, though there are a bunch of sub = cases depending on if the ID is just an individual submission w/ no = review, an active w.g. document, or approved by a stream for = publication. I conclude that calling them =E2=80=9Cwork in progress=E2=80= =9D may or may not be correct when an RFC is published with a reference = to an ID, and certainly not true 10 years later. I don=E2=80=99t think we want to have labels for each stage of an IDs = life because it changes over time. Perhaps calling them something like = =E2=80=9Cworking draft=E2=80=9D or similar might be better than =E2=80=9Cw= ork in progress=E2=80=9D. It doesn=E2=80=99t imply it is changing. Since they don=E2=80=99t appear to be ephemeral any longer, including a = link in the reference might be useful. Bob >=20 > -Heather > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --Apple-Mail=_D5F9E228-356C-4DBC-AD45-B80243134DD9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJZRDN6AAoJEK7rdBF357uoRbQH+wfneGqOM2/1AT2xj/fBeTX2 lmRx8L646zxB/Tnx+6BD/EnBD3InjPWAOPNVOwql5NxOy/YUbWcVWLyZHb8K7rh+ KtQpriRJZ1uBifN6Jqm8x/4o4rxlC9nbZKhaJMdhIzCVxrXUWa7R1V2paF9f/2xQ 6mOVVfkrdpafjkm1G0+YEEhkcqnfQ+vgUgvvg4CJA82XAq92RDrqKXBzUXzhH80I zuTTTjNvevg/JO+f5ROFhc6MtPq3i8P2X/INXM0z5RD+5c2xRVXdsFwCYmA82AHg zOz+FXVfXnvDhnAJJbyU2NA5SDa1WanI0p3h036igJ1IQ9NxCKre7ib0TibN2P8= =U1W2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_D5F9E228-356C-4DBC-AD45-B80243134DD9-- --===============0774388060360773228== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============0774388060360773228==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 12:49:45 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E633B13183B for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:49:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9DmGYN2-8_Kr for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:49:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2471E131618 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:49:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A960B80D78; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:49:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C6EAB80D78 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:49:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id emkI7MmU0r34 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:49:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15752B80D77 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:49:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 250A81CA532; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:49:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YKgI-x6x_snd; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:49:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E5E091CA42D; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:49:27 -0700 (PDT) To: Bob Hinden References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> <030DC553-3338-476F-A077-529F0193BEF1@gmail.com> <5aa0cab7-d5cc-a8e0-1b1e-465067d5fa13@rfc-editor.org> <2F061E95-0D7D-478C-8CCB-4B501F157F61@gmail.com> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: <923e7dca-2394-f17a-50cc-f4bd21a7e4d5@rfc-editor.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:49:39 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2F061E95-0D7D-478C-8CCB-4B501F157F61@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" T24gNi8xNi8xNyAxMjozNyBQTSwgQm9iIEhpbmRlbiB3cm90ZToKPiBIZWF0aGVyLAo+Cj4+IE9u IEp1biAxNiwgMjAxNywgYXQgMTE6MTYgQU0sIEhlYXRoZXIgRmxhbmFnYW4gKFJGQyBTZXJpZXMg RWRpdG9yKSA8cnNlQHJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnPiB3cm90ZToKPj4KPj4gT24gNi8xNS8xNyAxMToz OCBBTSwgQm9iIEhpbmRlbiB3cm90ZToKPj4+PiBPbiBKdW4gMTUsIDIwMTcsIGF0IDE6MzcgQU0s IEp1bGlhbiBSZXNjaGtlIDxqdWxpYW4ucmVzY2hrZUBnbXguZGU+IHdyb3RlOgo+Pj4+Cj4+Pj4g T24gMjAxNy0wNi0xNSAwMjowMywgQnJpYW4gRSBDYXJwZW50ZXIgd3JvdGU6Cj4+Pj4+IC4uLgo+ Pj4+PiBUaGlzIHRyaWdnZXJzIG9uZSBvZiBteSBob2JieS1ob3JzZXMsIEknbSBhZnJhaWQuCj4+ Pj4+IElmIEkgcmVmZXIgdG8gYW4gSS1EIGJlY2F1c2UgaXQncyB1c2VmdWwgcmVhZGluZyBidXQg bm90IHlldCBwdWJsaXNoZWQsIEknbSBoYXBweSB3aXRoIGl0IGJlaW5nIHRhZ2dlZCBhcyAiV29y ayBpbiBwcm9ncmVzcyIuIEEgc21hcnQgcmVhZGVyIG1heSBldmVuIGhhdmUgdGhlIGlkZWEgdG8g bG9vayBmb3IgYSBjb3JyZXNwb25kaW5nIFJGQy4KPj4+Pj4gSWYgSSByZWZlciB0byBhbiBJLUQg YmVjYXVzZSBpdCBoYXMgaGlzdG9yaWNhbCB2YWx1ZSwgSSB3b3VsZCBwcmVmZXIgaXQgdG8gYmUg dGFnZ2VkIGFzICJVbnB1Ymxpc2hlZCBkcmFmdCIgYW5kIGhhdmUgYW4gZXhhY3QgdmVyc2lvbiBu dW1iZXIgKGFuZCBkYXRlKS4gQ2FsbGluZyBpdCAiV29yayBpbiBwcm9ncmVzcyIgaXMgZWl0aGVy IGluYXBwcm9wcmlhdGUgb3Igc2ltcGx5IHVudHJ1ZS4KPj4+Pj4gVG9kYXkgd2UgaGF2ZSBubyBt ZXRhZGF0YSB0byBzZXBhcmF0ZSB0aGUgdHdvIGNhc2VzLgo+Pj4+PiAuLi4KPj4+PiArMQo+Pj4+ Cj4+PiBJIHRlbmQgdG8gYWdyZWUgYXMgd2VsbC4gIFRob3VnaCBJIGFtIG5vdCBzdXJlIOKAnHVu cHVibGlzaGVkIGRyYWZ04oCdIGlzIGV4YWN0bHkgcmlnaHQgc2luY2UgdGhlIGRyYWZ0IGlzIGF2 YWlsYWJsZSBvbmxpbmUuICBXZSB0cmVhdCBJbnRlcm5ldCBEcmFmdHMgYXMgdGVtcG9yYXJ5LCBh bmQgYXQgdGhlIHNhbWUgdGltZSBwZXJtYW5lbnQuICBTdGFydGluZyB0byBzZWVtIG1vcmUgbGlr ZSB0aGUgbGF0ZXIuCj4+Pgo+Pj4gV2h5IGRvbuKAmXQgd2UgaW5jbHVkZSBhIGxpbmsgdG8gdGhl IEludGVybmV0IERyYWZ0IGluIHRoZSByZWZlcmVuY2UgbGlrZSB3ZSBkbyBmb3IgUkZDcz8KPj4+ Cj4+Pgo+PiBIaXN0b3JpY2FsbHksIGl0J3MgdG8gZW5mb3JjZSB0aGUgZmFjZSB0aGF0IEktRHMg YXJlIG5vdCBlcXVhbCB0byBSRkNzLAo+PiBhbmQgYmVjYXVzZSBJLUQgVVJMcyB3ZXJlIGVwaGVt ZXJhbCAoc2luY2UgSS1EcyB3b3VsZCBkaXNhcHBlYXIgYWZ0ZXIKPj4gc2l4IG1vbnRocykuIFRo ZSBsYXR0ZXIgaXMgbm8gbG9uZ2VyIHRydWUuIEhvdyBkbyB5b3UgZmVlbCBhYm91dCB0aGUgZm9y bWVyPwo+IENlcnRhaW5seSBJLURzIGFyZSBub3QgZXF1YWwgdG8gUkZDcywgdGhvdWdoIHRoZXJl IGFyZSBhIGJ1bmNoIG9mIHN1YiBjYXNlcyBkZXBlbmRpbmcgb24gaWYgdGhlIElEIGlzIGp1c3Qg YW4gaW5kaXZpZHVhbCBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIHcvIG5vIHJldmlldywgYW4gYWN0aXZlIHcuZy4gZG9j dW1lbnQsIG9yIGFwcHJvdmVkIGJ5IGEgc3RyZWFtIGZvciBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbi4gIEkgY29uY2x1 ZGUgdGhhdCBjYWxsaW5nIHRoZW0g4oCcd29yayBpbiBwcm9ncmVzc+KAnSBtYXkgb3IgbWF5IG5v dCBiZSBjb3JyZWN0IHdoZW4gYW4gUkZDIGlzIHB1Ymxpc2hlZCB3aXRoIGEgcmVmZXJlbmNlIHRv IGFuIElELCBhbmQgY2VydGFpbmx5IG5vdCB0cnVlIDEwIHllYXJzIGxhdGVyLgo+Cj4gSSBkb27i gJl0IHRoaW5rIHdlIHdhbnQgdG8gaGF2ZSBsYWJlbHMgZm9yIGVhY2ggc3RhZ2Ugb2YgYW4gSURz IGxpZmUgYmVjYXVzZSBpdCBjaGFuZ2VzIG92ZXIgdGltZS4gIFBlcmhhcHMgY2FsbGluZyB0aGVt IHNvbWV0aGluZyBsaWtlIOKAnHdvcmtpbmcgZHJhZnTigJ0gb3Igc2ltaWxhciBtaWdodCBiZSBi ZXR0ZXIgdGhhbiDigJx3b3JrIGluIHByb2dyZXNz4oCdLiAgSXQgZG9lc27igJl0IGltcGx5IGl0 IGlzIGNoYW5naW5nLgoKUHJvY2VzcyBxdWVzdGlvbjogRG9lcyB0aGlzIHN1Z2dlc3Qgd2UgbmVl ZCB0byBkbyBzb21ldGhpbmcgc3BlY2lhbCB0bwp1cGRhdGUgUkZDIDIwMjYgKHdoaWNoIGlzIHdo ZXJlIHRoZSAiV29yayBpbiBQcm9ncmVzcyIgdGVybSBmb3IgSS1Ecwpjb21lcyBmcm9tKT8gKFNl ZSBTZWN0aW9uIDIuMikuCgo+Cj4gU2luY2UgdGhleSBkb27igJl0IGFwcGVhciB0byBiZSBlcGhl bWVyYWwgYW55IGxvbmdlciwgaW5jbHVkaW5nIGEgbGluayBpbiB0aGUgcmVmZXJlbmNlIG1pZ2h0 IGJlIHVzZWZ1bC4KCkknbSBmaW5lIHdpdGggdGhhdC4KCi1IZWF0aGVyCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCnJmYy1pbnRlcmVzdCBtYWlsaW5nIGxp c3QKcmZjLWludGVyZXN0QHJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3Jn L21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vcmZjLWludGVyZXN0Cg== From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 13:10:00 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DF1C1293F2 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:10:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.892 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.892 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=comcast.net Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ikIuKUdZy7HE for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:09:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CDD7127078 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:09:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FE5CB80A45; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:09:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C9E3B80A45 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:09:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=comcast.net Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5r82gn1DU26D for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:09:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from resqmta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E43BAB80A44 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:09:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from resomta-ch2-18v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.114]) by resqmta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id LxYvd9WDpAfZsLxZ2d0Krv; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:09:52 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20161114; t=1497643792; bh=N1BngFrU3YO94mXIT/tWfl5TDH/6jWPVdBRnbhzsZ4w=; h=Received:Received:Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=ooZUWfNonABWS3166O3LdQPnDi9dtl5vPr7BxdtH1C6ewLFSLyAfGAwFw2SUaYzI1 TLvxYOFcait5Nh94Rzqc9vsbEQI8jNy5ZBbJTgi1z2riAOhw2z1oIOOJvMB5bLLvv3 6bGssgKC2xmPJizQS0nT2vA1EVOTv78XT3teVasQf/Zdpc3ez8CIVVk6fTPKXldkYn A3yhKkRHRtGHdmD2eXgTJvc/uEECJqM/XyhwmHce5Bp1VQtiU+QngxP3YLvfQIQt5I ZIZkUG8HFtY0hRTTsAfU4xar6K1yIauIgYW4lsphIXy0JSojuJL0WjPEQNwnU5l3UO SzqwQnDluM1dA== Received: from [192.168.1.110] ([24.62.227.142]) by resomta-ch2-18v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id LxZ1dPNLPKn57LxZ1dr38N; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:09:52 +0000 To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> <97bf81f3-3cd0-cb17-750b-a12910e97413@rfc-editor.org> From: Paul Kyzivat Message-ID: <2f8405b7-1577-bde7-b88a-205ca4d03506@comcast.net> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 16:09:51 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <97bf81f3-3cd0-cb17-750b-a12910e97413@rfc-editor.org> Content-Language: en-US X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfLpHwQzM/wk0/bvMZ9vHz0q3fG8n4ZmI0OQIuY8Qg60+ASrn8ZtyEkCwvpxzO9ZJZfLcpa0ysmevID1Bwq1Negi213L2QSoxbtcjjCDS5BES1PLfypXL YugLhfR80kS+DMpOlV0170N9CjGKI4qqfgLOFUX5ZkiaHe4EcWU/1KwZRfAACVWCtfUlzFe/oymj7Q== Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 6/16/17 3:13 PM, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > On 6/16/17 11:42 AM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: >> On 6/16/17 2:33 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: >>> On 2017-06-16 20:19, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >>>> ... >>>> Who would make the call as to whether an I-D is a work in progress or a >>>> [stale|historic|overtaken by events|your favorite term here] I-D? It's >>>> not a simple case of time, and the author of the I-D being referenced >>>> might have a difference of opinion than the author doing the >>>> referencing. >>>> ... >>> >>> There'll be edge cases, right. But if an ID hasn't been updated in >>> years, it's likely abandoned, right? >> >> Isn't it sufficient to define that an ID that is the most recent version >> and hasn't expired is a work in progress, and that others are historic? >> > > I don't think it's quite that tidy. For example, there are drafts that > are expired but which are in one of the stream manager's queue for > consideration (e.g., > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-young-entity-category/). *That* is a whole different issue. IMO those should not expire! > There's also a certain consideration about how useful it is to make this > distinction when someone reads the RFC referencing these I-Ds in a year; > all the I-Ds may be historic, or may be revised, or may be replaced, or > a mix of all the above. Unless the author of the RFC doing the > referencing is careful to explain the context in which he or she is > referencing the I-D (which they should do regardless) I'm not sure we're > helping the reader with an "the I-D being referenced was older than six > months at the time this RFC was published". Yeah, guess so. If change description from "Work in Progress" to "Working Draft" then it ages better, and maybe no need to make a distinction for historic. Thanks, Paul _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 13:22:13 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC1A7131877 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:22:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MGXurc3UMekx for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:22:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A1AE127869 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:22:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 234F1B80C65; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:21:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A80D1B80C65; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:21:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C5uPVHohb4Jl; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:21:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D04BEB80C64; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:21:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.75.184]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M1nOg-1dgVi30WDa-00ti6U; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 22:22:05 +0200 To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <95fdafee-d05c-ab6a-0e15-fc6780f0f909@gmx.de> <6b70c6d8-4b82-6198-69a8-89a8fb14b77d@gmx.de> <60634b87-fe8a-1081-54e2-db0636efe4d1@rfc-editor.org> <7c0b6cff-4968-945a-68fb-b12e52ede60f@gmx.de> From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <1b4b6613-eb13-0200-80ff-a6d645ed1ef5@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 22:22:03 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:sOaOumCjmK/VJBSHamtvaHu9Y58/f11/asVBX76FTciWCzxwQYR YiB/zloY8D3M/yvPPB2jCXx4xaZ4fYQ710l1IV5ePQSjGru04KJ8WpbkwW+0/HmWJ7sTfR7 XDuGu99CQrtXDkqY8C1YhVb8JKFRDoPzHOz34cv8h9JBUvoIqzOXaYtMKiKUX5vcN+QR7Z/ d6fOX8SCJlzWJx+Ecv9XQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:wsBsc9UWMJU=:ChwEmdwn2yyF0gF8Jo36gp 8m3W+1AzpnMcAIeEk341gFHvnou5dt3ojam9yStMe+dLb0bM7xxnTTj9A+CN29XMP6B3F7xIj COMJnHDry+IcA8+hQLiQb+pjpS4di/rfaH5DOA0bSIJ/DCObrK58BUqsOxLTWwF2XtTRxEI3S KGNcViV+00wUdcfSUeG12w+F0GJNlGPwqI176xwCYRFe8F2ZQ/8ws0TgTZAGq9D+l4e8t06fQ 0l16JPZ0YfKSHyFvtalRoLN9/iZcQzMbV89wwPj3eAVoMGSSv4Ml0xTeB77mZ9TBo0EUOaKYJ lwA5ZOpaGvY4ULtSzwQW2eL6pRF1zF3VPnYqSD3NYX+pkprr4IGtUJQpBK0lYE3NRxHAR56B3 aPNvmzLUR7obs7EOkFzHWDgsIzKIp81qhz/CCkitlAEQEmCREBddlOh8wNnecl8NQ9XygrVv8 SoLlPgc/sXpmKz35AX7eT730a3upLzq82DiiQa2l9uOwsO0TH7dvI9nim6GiiMPZq0m8y2rg0 eoCvcL0OxuZdZ9rRDr9dASBkyB7kpHP79VcQV/iR1rhWSTK+l0uqoai8ZXQAI9uVQI5QHCPiz 7F0NYucHAr+qEP99NS0KgvXPTxAMhXNmDClmkskiE8+SiihYO/h6GetkGDEO3AJOUxtVJ8i8R mHPSwr+n6tDzKnSCiuIlcX5i8P9uMG5NKrhaRrqNd61OxXpdpiwXtepcDQIkxQtKsrjvJrWH4 2klE7vOv3XpMTl/Qsn1AF1zp4wR9oWH1HSmSN8ZDMC+AMpoGBiolpfWCTEh/vLDoEFiy3n6Jv hhtavQx Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing STDs and BCPs X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 2017-06-16 20:54, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > ... >> Right now, it will fail because the anchor elements would be in conflict. > > How? The anchor element can (should!) be unique, differentiating between > a reference to STD### versus a reference to RFC####. > > (I hate that feeling that I must be missing something obvious.) > ... If we follow the syntax defined in , then yes, we might have duplicate anchors. Best regards, Julian _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 13:49:10 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA2111289B5 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:49:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.891 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.891 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6-3WfeDt3_kn for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:49:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2D78127869 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:49:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41BE9B80D29; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:48:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A719B80D28 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:48:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WpSq90LoyTaD for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:48:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf0-x22a.google.com (mail-pf0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22a]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41C48B80D26 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:48:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id 83so27324121pfr.0 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:49:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UHpr/wHn9BxEfmLODTsFRkYZG282Z8oyZAFg8m8RBAk=; b=dFe1GfJZYhYoz28TJ1TuFEEQMaV0kuSZlQ/bozXrACmUKakRLbAmhDcyvEwRDghbdB nJGF5j+33cbEAmtA4tHt6tgpsXaajZge1z7wL9YvGSKDF/YuqOkGJF9OERZX5+6n9gKZ CASyuypwZTeR2JJSIi8UmH52LLx49Uletiv0cE8tOtE+8SNxARNanA2AaGqYI9O2IVy8 mrTBP+LT8AF2k9ai8mxtNJmCF8UAV5YUlmKbcWNx8fGdmuD9+oi2nadbxe37FSyz5wXs PdV1LBSgwKz/W78uAD5rGLNhmxG8fPhkhf1m/z5ujS7wOQK68k12MH55ept4uV16nwMO 4QLg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UHpr/wHn9BxEfmLODTsFRkYZG282Z8oyZAFg8m8RBAk=; b=OYqDB/3qvKpZffiGguKKIXnHMbETUTuB5aIhPVg5VwPVuKic/pzYT0DNMcEJPeB0zb G7EQzK8ivPP9GgYwCoCu00lna0TtX2mEjRS4drHi+7eeEp3VKuAPgM7rPPoqvJ0JiwzX XCW23Wz+b8W3xxBZgbXniv90RYFkUkRw+x3Phe9O9m4yWFTnnv9svO9tKdp91jCWojTs 2UmuvvX0j4bfEtTPi50PnsF8oo88iC/vBBomSSfljKxn5orZyJz+uxPxPamBYTe+0qV9 5C0Q5aJS+L/sKX82wSTZo2kEo32erbkhR4UydcHrCef/Jenq4zQsDIxEoXvUsJFCXFS8 7wuQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOy57hzMbdYQllFSMc1SU4bowpT6Q+tI9x8iVHeGiNRA/QaH8ivf bwac0DMamdIv+c9t X-Received: by 10.98.61.88 with SMTP id k85mr13076010pfa.90.1497646144296; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:49:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e001:3d1c:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e001:3d1c:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u194sm6026374pgb.24.2017.06.16.13.49.02 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:49:03 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <148916689952.6827.6792653811413720687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <383fa41c-e289-8045-7c1f-fcdcd8cc8445@rfc-editor.org> <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> <97bf81f3-3cd0-cb17-750b-a12910e97413@rfc-editor.org> <2f8405b7-1577-bde7-b88a-205ca4d03506@comcast.net> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: <4ebac503-4b57-0aa3-6e10-c98fe7dd2c5a@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:49:11 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2f8405b7-1577-bde7-b88a-205ca4d03506@comcast.net> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 17/06/2017 08:09, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > On 6/16/17 3:13 PM, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >> On 6/16/17 11:42 AM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: >>> On 6/16/17 2:33 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: >>>> On 2017-06-16 20:19, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >>>>> ... >>>>> Who would make the call as to whether an I-D is a work in progress or a >>>>> [stale|historic|overtaken by events|your favorite term here] I-D? It's >>>>> not a simple case of time, and the author of the I-D being referenced >>>>> might have a difference of opinion than the author doing the >>>>> referencing. >>>>> ... >>>> >>>> There'll be edge cases, right. But if an ID hasn't been updated in >>>> years, it's likely abandoned, right? >>> >>> Isn't it sufficient to define that an ID that is the most recent version >>> and hasn't expired is a work in progress, and that others are historic? >>> >> >> I don't think it's quite that tidy. For example, there are drafts that >> are expired but which are in one of the stream manager's queue for >> consideration (e.g., >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-young-entity-category/). > > *That* is a whole different issue. IMO those should not expire! > >> There's also a certain consideration about how useful it is to make this >> distinction when someone reads the RFC referencing these I-Ds in a year; >> all the I-Ds may be historic, or may be revised, or may be replaced, or >> a mix of all the above. Unless the author of the RFC doing the >> referencing is careful to explain the context in which he or she is >> referencing the I-D (which they should do regardless) I'm not sure we're >> helping the reader with an "the I-D being referenced was older than six >> months at the time this RFC was published". > > Yeah, guess so. > > If change description from "Work in Progress" to "Working Draft" then it > ages better, and maybe no need to make a distinction for historic. Yes, that would work, I think. Heather is correct that this issue is rare, and the distinction is a judgment call. But it disturbs me (mildly) that the phrase "Work in Progress" is occasionally used when it's manifestly untrue. Brian _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 13:51:35 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6FF812896F for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:51:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=yitter.info header.b=BZDSc6+7; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=yitter.info header.b=mBHOI+Kl Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NVyUoNnhnbey for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:51:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CF83127869 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:51:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C83AB80D39; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:51:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2546B80D39 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:51:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=BZDSc6+7; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=mBHOI+Kl Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mVILfSM5Qonp for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:51:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx4.yitter.info (mx4.yitter.info [159.203.56.111]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92DBAB80D38 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 13:51:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1DE9BE9B7 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:51:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1497646289; bh=7Qk/W4lCxptQ0LKTeu+oZZ0M7wISrMl/rhEbVoM80+g=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=BZDSc6+7K+jEeiG8r8eXxRk3UPSoTGufFSBXKIRDfzyp1TDe5wydcbiTOHST7tJpa iJd5BulhhjiZve2tSU7BEizMkjkEhJIJj6+7z5T4vNIFibrRlx84ebYY7M/nnTZVtW NksEgTT7kGkV80B/5shV21DXKLFyiEJTfTvCE3QY= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca Received: from mx4.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N8NhzCjJ6Hec for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:51:28 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 16:51:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1497646288; bh=7Qk/W4lCxptQ0LKTeu+oZZ0M7wISrMl/rhEbVoM80+g=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=mBHOI+Kl5gjlNOAQgf8D5wPaWb1ZTx5Qc2Op+dbWKSF2V4fecj1QqHRYPdDpNaVcK HaU6mJVvt5YXB4nte/pDN1MLJhKcFIrJnZqW3vd3q3jGo4GJaHgAjxlcAFiPZSKjdQ FNV4bxF/vo67KOtHyYtYpaJfKPNsdca3kkkNzWfI= From: Andrew Sullivan To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Message-ID: <20170616205127.d32hpn5a7np6m2k4@mx4.yitter.info> References: <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> <97bf81f3-3cd0-cb17-750b-a12910e97413@rfc-editor.org> <2f8405b7-1577-bde7-b88a-205ca4d03506@comcast.net> <4ebac503-4b57-0aa3-6e10-c98fe7dd2c5a@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4ebac503-4b57-0aa3-6e10-c98fe7dd2c5a@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 08:49:11AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > rare, and the distinction is a judgment call. But it disturbs me (mildly) > that the phrase "Work in Progress" is occasionally used when it's > manifestly untrue. It isn't really. The document in question was in progress when work halted. There's no way to know whether it'll ever be picked up again. I don't really care about this, but I sort of hate opening important procedural documents needlessly. A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Fri Jun 16 14:50:53 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56E131204DA for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:50:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.891 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.891 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 93n1jcAK8hx2 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:50:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A2741201F2 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:50:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE427B8105D; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:50:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43669B8105D for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:50:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ObngH83Py3tW for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:50:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf0-x231.google.com (mail-pf0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::231]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AFDAB8105C for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:50:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x231.google.com with SMTP id s66so27842481pfs.1 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:50:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SX2Q3oIS1IHh1ZA8cIIczsMAWojfPgvsTO/6j9nKjRE=; b=NV5CfuLKVe3XM4X/NHbK42qleqLfIkUwpyoNKaWtCIUG7DyjVhKXFdmUAFXS2InlbW j37UJ4V8IHmSr3MK8+4fa4RIPugjlqf8QkFhCDVyLd/tCdNXra3S78BMAUv5hXN8f9Xi t0QeqRyIgNXWBR4ZuNtfJ31KLX+61xGyNSTdeUZNPMQn9+SLyF5HnbvYx202KYszwYae kMVJqYGfSo25Gc6ByTZCPIbcwyoh30aDnIOX9gBwDu4NCsXGqEjQnJyLKiDer5PGilpa 6Y+EapVtqEW89GdTApQzka65A6Vw1Yn2C8aehPFgDUmPzbA/m0SL0K7Nt8P8tzGVvoE2 5JKg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SX2Q3oIS1IHh1ZA8cIIczsMAWojfPgvsTO/6j9nKjRE=; b=m2UMfDI2KkriwupwXHHQDw4BVQuUW814WzpEIyLDNgCWG2+4iFzkhv0AnlhUfFAq81 BQOqVmOg2aU+ZcZAjG95XRhDhQbfQMOnfp5ERuHvO3d3KPSzxBbXE5LtSYs/mzelvGKj x4nWoqjissPNaPyOR0RYgcc671jJUTSK8DYeaC36NwiQiEysC1a+1gXvEmOaskptAl33 QQQF68o++jbhfk8MjUz1FVo0vMA0wjhcky/KWsFxPh002WovNs0El+EGSVJ0blxKzzwB 6gQSmVpdYy0F1ibaEOPl1urtFBe1Up+DGQ1sHHP6/eH4EzGHCQvkhH2UyA2IN2XAFmTu wbag== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOwlFsWa/X1YkGb7ajAzoiyWu6M5dLye/Uq2t2EHpqN2BnZbSr2x +Tzq7nPx8TfEsJn9 X-Received: by 10.84.199.170 with SMTP id r39mr15243794pld.204.1497649848201; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:50:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e001:3d1c:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e001:3d1c:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g28sm6308245pgn.58.2017.06.16.14.50.46 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:50:47 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> <97bf81f3-3cd0-cb17-750b-a12910e97413@rfc-editor.org> <2f8405b7-1577-bde7-b88a-205ca4d03506@comcast.net> <4ebac503-4b57-0aa3-6e10-c98fe7dd2c5a@gmail.com> <20170616205127.d32hpn5a7np6m2k4@mx4.yitter.info> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: <3a187b49-65a7-3599-5afb-b4d8571a850c@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 09:50:55 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170616205127.d32hpn5a7np6m2k4@mx4.yitter.info> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 17/06/2017 08:51, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 08:49:11AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> rare, and the distinction is a judgment call. But it disturbs me (mildly) >> that the phrase "Work in Progress" is occasionally used when it's >> manifestly untrue. > > It isn't really. The document in question was in progress when work > halted. There's no way to know whether it'll ever be picked up again. > > I don't really care about this, but I sort of hate opening important > procedural documents needlessly. Agreed. There are many more important issues in BCP9 that we leave untouched. But IMHO the way "Work in Progress" is mentioned in RFC2026 leaves the RFC Editor discretion to use a different phrase for purely historical references. If the RFC Editor doesn't want to, I will not sulk. Brian _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sun Jun 18 02:26:49 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E8AE1298BA for ; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 02:26:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.891 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.891 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Aq13k6ly8Izg for ; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 02:26:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C2FB12944F for ; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 02:26:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26AEFB8121E; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 02:26:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 885FBB8121E for ; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 02:26:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 25FU8fv1MWoo for ; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 02:26:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wr0-x234.google.com (mail-wr0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::234]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCA0CB8121D for ; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 02:26:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr0-x234.google.com with SMTP id 77so57312512wrb.1 for ; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 02:26:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=lWMCaE4jwB1dcDxMev9QxMsV4EL5/ibQLZobxb/9zaQ=; b=sTt/tmPzcad34kmjes7URdXu7ydCNWuetDATUeFvqMpHDBhFoOu97X/WIzp29Ep9cs XfUfVToR0kfmscFNqnDrKDO8sAE6fITE1neCO6yPXleEG6D8FenKqQq9AX+Rppeiv0uB P8haSGH+SxVaiGK1qV+w06cXABO6LtcAQ7V2N7giGIM/Qx7DZzZKlztQwYptVuIQSBiZ KhMS82yt7x4hoMALAR9FvTw8lo/DgUL8YZ5m74tJeML6hKNtauux0w0NASg/9UDhfwdw 1FuIEU9H0HjrFRqOxwmCn93N1t53NMADsWpektvvMgqA0xZo/nlaTQbmm3C8lOckJP77 NGng== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=lWMCaE4jwB1dcDxMev9QxMsV4EL5/ibQLZobxb/9zaQ=; b=T5XE8XuLIbHMsVsGAnpQ8GBR1wbTFDIxTKcJFaZ6GfKXAU4EaFvZ/8UUER4rTuQpTu LjvorW7jGOKBTjqNTlhghgpLvMd5vivDLE7mNYSmkihRUIrdeKxcFIUJKOeOWljiK6xU 7paqNPlsM5RC8A6xi9VUDUCS4oBR8UZomfNdva7vySpSxDLgjf2aJsdLyQUQKzvnc5FY xHHxhnlmoiVBroJEzLCQH/jMLVpY9NotcLJueuUUgAh25Mg6Ew8M7bu/VyNWfT892iBc 7Y6Ds1b0xjR7YJ6CWnWzWQsQiIPeVu9hah2LxlUrUs2oGWXxWqVK5oYt51foIKeJANF3 2T7Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOxFVxfsK0SjW8FfHuq5Rpvq5txHmWmo8wHB4TA5CVb/DLzwXD/g 5XluiMacyYG2pg== X-Received: by 10.223.155.214 with SMTP id e22mr12131110wrc.33.1497778001905; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 02:26:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.24.228.74] (dyn32-131.checkpoint.com. [194.29.32.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b32sm10280907wrd.40.2017.06.18.02.26.39 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 18 Jun 2017 02:26:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Hinden Message-Id: <253B0C9D-9991-431A-95BE-1600835CC904@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 12:26:35 +0300 In-Reply-To: <3a187b49-65a7-3599-5afb-b4d8571a850c@gmail.com> To: Brian Carpenter References: <1cd9c597-f945-6b22-d0fb-8623897b678d@gmx.de> <27887A7B-DD5A-4D10-B307-44AD342B4F74@tzi.org> <0c97b073-80ca-9dd8-3f3e-30cc874a2a9d@gmail.com> <97bf81f3-3cd0-cb17-750b-a12910e97413@rfc-editor.org> <2f8405b7-1577-bde7-b88a-205ca4d03506@comcast.net> <4ebac503-4b57-0aa3-6e10-c98fe7dd2c5a@gmail.com> <20170616205127.d32hpn5a7np6m2k4@mx4.yitter.info> <3a187b49-65a7-3599-5afb-b4d8571a850c@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Referencing Internet Drafts X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org, Bob Hinden Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6986555231835668785==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============6986555231835668785== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_98213352-CFE9-430A-B1BC-F1D2A861052F"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 --Apple-Mail=_98213352-CFE9-430A-B1BC-F1D2A861052F Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On Jun 17, 2017, at 12:50 AM, Brian E Carpenter = wrote: >=20 > On 17/06/2017 08:51, Andrew Sullivan wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 08:49:11AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>> rare, and the distinction is a judgment call. But it disturbs me = (mildly) >>> that the phrase "Work in Progress" is occasionally used when it's >>> manifestly untrue. >>=20 >> It isn't really. The document in question was in progress when work >> halted. There's no way to know whether it'll ever be picked up = again. >>=20 >> I don't really care about this, but I sort of hate opening important >> procedural documents needlessly. >=20 > Agreed. There are many more important issues in BCP9 that we leave > untouched. But IMHO the way "Work in Progress" is mentioned in > RFC2026 leaves the RFC Editor discretion to use a different phrase > for purely historical references. If the RFC Editor doesn't want to, > I will not sulk. I think it would be good to file an errata on RFC2026 in any case. = What=E2=80=99s happing now does not match the text in RFC2026. Bob --Apple-Mail=_98213352-CFE9-430A-B1BC-F1D2A861052F Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJZRkdLAAoJEK7rdBF357uoXQEH/RKKaXFEn+UHt0M/oxJr69PQ 2M1sHOQu3DqNu4kZPHU3NinyHB8kftvOvcRbBg7yf59bAIya9XYPLvYUnAqjXUDi Gsagsv9swF9GPzlWNExPZpfh5qnQrNwldlULj0/tSzeCVR3b8jb3hgTkWZHEz589 Bn31E8ihhCnMJy9HiodA7MtzkZoB3RZDcBxdV0EcKw0CtWl0QCGpegKK16Pt0BbD YqW6Y9w4k8hhJIUoJK4io7LZq9lBGbSrrJOhhdmL/huatErRZGkioQO6EjQOjNgq 2y6qTN8YGu/7KXCgUsvzyrtqbHicN2umhzT5mn4k4+1f32dLLnuzbJttHIvsfA8= =1SPr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_98213352-CFE9-430A-B1BC-F1D2A861052F-- --===============6986555231835668785== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============6986555231835668785==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Thu Jun 22 00:58:19 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93F93126C3D for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:58:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=netapp.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oPYLbIFqc_Nv for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:58:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC3051279EB for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:58:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAEF5B80F6B; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:57:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D8EAB80F6B for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:57:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=netapp.onmicrosoft.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IUohaMEcWwWi for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx142.netapp.com (mx142.netapp.com [216.240.21.19]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B580B80F5F for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:57:52 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.39,372,1493708400"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="196144201" Received: from hioexcmbx01-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.122.105.34]) by mx142-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 22 Jun 2017 00:34:35 -0700 Received: from VMWEXCCAS11-PRD.hq.netapp.com (10.122.105.29) by hioexcmbx01-prd.hq.netapp.com (10.122.105.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:53:04 -0700 Received: from NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (10.120.60.153) by VMWEXCCAS11-PRD.hq.netapp.com (10.122.105.29) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:53:04 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netapp.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-netapp-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=lx84of/29vCQpjeAgtJu0F4deJJPdR4bAhs6QH5m3Zg=; b=abkZ1h7MNw2yFNx42eA9syt8qtQqns0vm1Sx/LYbvivQeEy2plAIqxKPcbx9vuwYgszs054rFOEFErN1gbvJTcRDRs0w8yEiw9mhRMl2Ny1KcD+KVRxwm4JMzOtupUZ9ZhQcuIxu+ff9q30yydRiS8N7XcIo9KarB5Ne03RUT6Y= Received: from BLUPR06MB1764.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.162.224.150) by BLUPR06MB1762.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.162.224.148) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1178.14; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 07:53:10 +0000 Received: from BLUPR06MB1764.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.224.150]) by BLUPR06MB1764.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.224.150]) with mapi id 15.01.1199.016; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 07:53:10 +0000 From: "Eggert, Lars" To: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" Thread-Topic: Author line oddity in citations Thread-Index: AQHS6yyXDMFh1qKapEKzpYh/JVoVEg== Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 07:53:09 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) authentication-results: rfc-editor.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;rfc-editor.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=netapp.com; x-originating-ip: [217.70.211.15] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR06MB1762; 7: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 x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 822abb26-a59d-4e08-ae19-08d4b943ba25 x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075)(49563074)(201703131423075)(201703031133081); SRVR:BLUPR06MB1762; x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BLUPR06MB1762: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000700101)(100105000095)(100000701101)(100105300095)(100000702101)(100105100095)(102415395)(6040450)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(93006095)(93001095)(100000703101)(100105400095)(10201501046)(6055026)(6041248)(201703131423075)(201702281528075)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123562025)(20161123555025)(20161123558100)(20161123560025)(20161123564025)(6072148)(100000704101)(100105200095)(100000705101)(100105500095); SRVR:BLUPR06MB1762; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000800101)(100110000095)(100000801101)(100110300095)(100000802101)(100110100095)(100000803101)(100110400095)(100000804101)(100110200095)(100000805101)(100110500095); SRVR:BLUPR06MB1762; x-forefront-prvs: 03468CBA43 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(39410400002)(39850400002)(39840400002)(39450400003)(39400400002)(2900100001)(102836003)(8936002)(2501003)(6116002)(50226002)(8676002)(36756003)(6486002)(77096006)(6306002)(6512007)(189998001)(53936002)(3280700002)(3660700001)(57306001)(2906002)(7736002)(122556002)(33656002)(86362001)(99286003)(66066001)(5640700003)(81166006)(305945005)(14454004)(6916009)(5660300001)(6506006)(83716003)(99936001)(82746002)(50986999)(3846002)(25786009)(110136004)(2351001)(38730400002)(478600001)(6436002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR06MB1762; H:BLUPR06MB1764.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en; spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 22 Jun 2017 07:53:09.7986 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 4b0911a0-929b-4715-944b-c03745165b3a X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR06MB1762 X-OriginatorOrg: netapp.com Subject: [rfc-i] Author line oddity in citations X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3803624031291119688==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============3803624031291119688== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F193B2CE-2CDC-4181-99D9-DAE649B084E4"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 --Apple-Mail=_F193B2CE-2CDC-4181-99D9-DAE649B084E4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, I just noticed that the author line in citations has an oddity, in the = sense that the name format is "Lastname, I." for all but the last = author, where it is "I. Lastname." [RFC5681] Allman, M., Paxson, V., and E. Blanton, "TCP Congestion Control", RFC 5681, DOI 10.17487/RFC5681, September 2009, . Is this on purpose, e.g., following some common citation style? Just = feels odd. Lars --Apple-Mail=_F193B2CE-2CDC-4181-99D9-DAE649B084E4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEmpq0ZpSoejRmyhheVLXDCb9wwVcFAllLd2IACgkQVLXDCb9w wVf1Yw/8DeZr38fO4EOHiDU3oIktFpOTJ1DW9JX9VZwXmKiQpm0MWA93ny905Qxv 7YqXrZF0ERqU6bsbXP9XEYi/v3U82ATAaYFlc9ZNTIKE2zskeP/4ILy/YE+1VlAU PI5kw7J5OY/rKMUiA84Dh8m90h25/TdbWoVvxpIsVLbB5t57QuEVW6OL9L6WqJBh cXyumg4SYTnT2jfk/NXgUuxfthW6GdosgadW/jgOdaajpglnnHkpa9LaoCTM1ZKW 3VQBluET/lh1tJHVu4danknk8Jttp7dXEY2ixUazqE92czDss0rkxz7JykeZG/EB ihBhrY6QZUFu70GripKXu9NTDG88dbjV2JnRlbAjs9rInSO+D33hh72GCD+44ZnS JXPqMFiyYZ8liSnPG1/WWndhLJxLSDnrdEETSl3xtmXcDOr+FWurksO6Jq9GPbNv 4CFgNRedV+DOzL8LXbvkdKXHkECJ8PhoNVBISKUMheghrVw+OAh/1d5viFjuhSrk 2BzyRUHi0ty9JE1TTPC+D0vlLEt03NmOQyEZrdA1Owa39Dqtz0DBF3TSXKX/vs5e pzi+/+uaO1Be4mbAB7K+yiY/MXZFrx5BH1l/ntTfz0dL9gXUMavyvVj8ssfjGovc CMjA9czoitVXfwqsWmhtD3Z9/0KhSt9BRDGAvvGZ6o6WaESoB3M= =v260 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_F193B2CE-2CDC-4181-99D9-DAE649B084E4-- --===============3803624031291119688== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============3803624031291119688==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Thu Jun 22 01:05:17 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23903128768 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:05:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.891 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.891 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bsOccO8hlOtG for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A477E1279EB for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F460B81068; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:04:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25639B81068 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:04:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tOur4O_I-0MM for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:04:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wr0-x233.google.com (mail-wr0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::233]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6871B81066 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:04:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr0-x233.google.com with SMTP id r103so12276490wrb.0 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:05:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=ZU5j3sg/4CFDapeDaWSW138jsfKvdaBNwNfn3guZSqI=; b=CZhG6oKyQILzQ6JR5sZD2tnkQllgdBviJw/TEqzSCoyBKZLDf+49b68stKZh7mAQfU lR3EpShvVJ4B5R4VZC72HNJPnB7wnRUfxDu2s+9PDbV609PC+qbJy6YWFcGNpnp1UMZ6 pVYR5HGqKsyXSNsD4TjikJJBitGMIIX4KMD4RdAiPreV/jFfFUud3ptTZI7yB+UrF8cU vy8TmsRGcJYvrAVmlzNBXX+0eenl0vi/MUXxli5FHee0wBsiPvHvjw/W2BgXzifiZncs rodSG3FBYzvwTZ87Y+dblMKRCNl/awjcmD09uFRZfn7vH9T4q9M4sIOyn9DSGepTY9Pa Y7+A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=ZU5j3sg/4CFDapeDaWSW138jsfKvdaBNwNfn3guZSqI=; b=aQ/Zm9Hn/XwMjp6ZCZWZV2CqR6PWm7Ca+GT6JaYafNp6UvZfMoWXg2ITqkuZ4suJlE w8HI3kHEmv6hgm2EWzkqzha0boPs5mIEFE4LP0t2MTYoTSGBhmZdKGLR5kddlASyEjlY r81X0wzS1t/Y0yN2URCn8N4WOiJrAAfwuly7M5IHb8yQ3GPNZheE1TxKQSJqP5YLIVhP 1bAb6nWy6+VDGI1ZWGmw6FPyk3F6FEoqNYRV6zPgRuzaOsVj2DvJ4HcxMvbwQ9ViaXOU 7l4l+fnjzgZ9xGR8vjc6mzmyU33Ll+Oi8lBGomhMCMh1Sqk2G8mOkdDoTJHLFTKCaild vqBw== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOwkXeWWqZy2qwHXfpHpm61WObs4zSLicR3d696/dlZHaFStr+ej Pg1k0xYMTuNwPQ== X-Received: by 10.28.0.78 with SMTP id 75mr703149wma.58.1498118702527; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:05:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.24.228.74] (dyn32-131.checkpoint.com. [194.29.32.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w128sm383555wmd.7.2017.06.22.01.05.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:05:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Hinden Message-Id: <4BCC2BBE-9BD1-48B5-90C4-9B9F6F035F1E@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:05:00 +0300 In-Reply-To: To: "Eggert, Lars" References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Author line oddity in citations X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" , Bob Hinden Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6915519733707353087==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============6915519733707353087== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0FB1E7B7-64EA-4696-ACC8-C3896E7889D4"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 --Apple-Mail=_0FB1E7B7-64EA-4696-ACC8-C3896E7889D4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Lars, > On Jun 22, 2017, at 10:53 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: >=20 > Hi, >=20 > I just noticed that the author line in citations has an oddity, in the = sense that the name format is "Lastname, I." for all but the last = author, where it is "I. Lastname." >=20 > [RFC5681] Allman, M., Paxson, V., and E. Blanton, "TCP Congestion > Control", RFC 5681, DOI 10.17487/RFC5681, September 2009, > . >=20 > Is this on purpose, e.g., following some common citation style? Just = feels odd. I don=E2=80=99t know the reasons, but it=E2=80=99s been done that way = for a long time. Bob >=20 > Lars > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --Apple-Mail=_0FB1E7B7-64EA-4696-ACC8-C3896E7889D4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJZS3otAAoJEK7rdBF357uouiMIAJIXbVPtdtMGm9jzzGQhbm+O R6VznH37py3uqsKLm2Fp3Kuz88ogfxibuRtxe4UqxSIQA54smMogp2Winu2QskJz NTfaMZpMqUTDqrGnZv9ZWSL7XSnFxKqsY4gmHahloJD+8dhwowZChwfkA3BoJFcO oxqQzfJVyCoXDUPP5zXSUO8PR3U/VUsg7H3Pp4TIrZ7Anmye0vcX2kxB+qLOq4Cw sa7sLGSC0SWQtPkirBMz0XWCzlK57KzERiv60slylD3LsbwFGnwniwPVtzrkX+EF ly/8yPMbXptNQC5BjzVAahGQjFxpf+N7yLOCpbc/Aqj6B9MNruQcWZcSJ/4rPrs= =Zgwo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_0FB1E7B7-64EA-4696-ACC8-C3896E7889D4-- --===============6915519733707353087== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============6915519733707353087==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Thu Jun 22 01:35:36 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 605CB1273E2 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:35:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CW4zQczy8eAy for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:35:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2B0B1242F7 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:35:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7D2CB8199E; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:35:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1826AB8199E for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:35:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7RW8aVKEnX4L for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:35:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB7BFB8199C for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:35:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.201.11]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v5M8ZMY2009850; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:35:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from client-0151.vpn.uni-bremen.de (client-0151.vpn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.107.151]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3wtZf16qhvz3ZZ4; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:35:21 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <4BCC2BBE-9BD1-48B5-90C4-9B9F6F035F1E@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:35:21 +0200 X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 519813321.253707-0898959ea069025d4ad920807ba97618 Message-Id: References: <4BCC2BBE-9BD1-48B5-90C4-9B9F6F035F1E@gmail.com> To: Bob Hinden X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Author line oddity in citations X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" T24gSnVuIDIyLCAyMDE3LCBhdCAxMDowNSwgQm9iIEhpbmRlbiA8Ym9iLmhpbmRlbkBnbWFpbC5j b20+IHdyb3RlOgo+IAo+IGEgbG9uZyB0aW1lCgrigJxMb25n4oCdIGFzIGluIOKAnFNpbmNlIFJG QyA3NTMsIEpvbiBQb3N0ZWwsIE1hcmNoIDE5NznigJ0uCgpHcsO8w59lLCBDYXJzdGVuCgpfX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXwpyZmMtaW50ZXJlc3Qg bWFpbGluZyBsaXN0CnJmYy1pbnRlcmVzdEByZmMtZWRpdG9yLm9yZwpodHRwczovL3d3dy5yZmMt ZWRpdG9yLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3JmYy1pbnRlcmVzdAo= From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Thu Jun 22 08:22:58 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDACD1292D3 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 08:22:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=me.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z3GTRxoPhoxK for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 08:22:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2803E127136 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 08:22:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6415B818CE; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 08:22:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C9C2B818CE for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 08:22:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=me.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u-VF1VfydI1e for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 08:22:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mr11p00im-asmtp002.me.com (mr11p00im-asmtp002.me.com [17.110.69.253]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D921FB818CD for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 08:22:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process-dkim-sign-daemon.mr11p00im-asmtp002.me.com by mr11p00im-asmtp002.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.38.0 64bit (built Feb 26 2016)) id <0ORY00C00DT24S00@mr11p00im-asmtp002.me.com> for rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:22:40 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=me.com; s=04042017; t=1498144960; bh=TBOBugez1I89RhwSpFdvVB4o4WhN7nf7tbsOBeIzumE=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-id:MIME-version:Content-type; b=NVj5UsXbioH9Odgcypr1rls1yOhVEaS+GTwmWh1yYgGsmKbaXyXIsRR/PVty7oaVl l8e2BJ+7oufM9wb60C9OVJu0TgFxRLNC90pO9ivC2tlh533hmBCR1lYYh/QbYJH+aI 6pk061Qz7rwYwDg/LsLqKHjOSHG9QoB4QRTAXYbKmQS7H2KCMu9XdpXm37k9DjkTB0 /lSE4fmhwboqXnAAtROzKXh0rmJt1kOP/A2dk3dYBbNPnm9/G1sd9WkzdoNGlV9QEm W6jv1thqpqhuW+ci1FUIjXjQZ4fgpfZA6KiMG6k43h+mkM3KTTcFS3RnRHcUlhUfBv SDplGXexP3tLw== Received: from icloud.com ([127.0.0.1]) by mr11p00im-asmtp002.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.38.0 64bit (built Feb 26 2016)) with ESMTPSA id <0ORY0054EG1CRN30@mr11p00im-asmtp002.me.com>; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:22:37 +0000 (GMT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-06-22_06:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1034 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1701120000 definitions=main-1706220266 Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 08:22:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Ole Jacobsen To: Carsten Bormann In-reply-to: Message-id: References: <4BCC2BBE-9BD1-48B5-90C4-9B9F6F035F1E@gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.01 (OSX 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="0-1322427983-1498144957=:29272" Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Author line oddity in citations X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Ole Jacobsen Cc: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" , Bob Hinden Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --0-1322427983-1498144957=:29272 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT The format is one of many used for citations. Wild guess: In the early days Jon Postel worked for a time at SRI with Jake Feinler who was a librarian by training. It may be that she suggested this format and it stuck. Useful tool developed by Henry: https://tools.ietf.org/tools/citation/ Use 1187 for your example, then change the string "{authors.rfclist}" to "{authors.andlist}" and you'll get the more common format. Ole On Thu, 22 Jun 2017, Carsten Bormann wrote: > On Jun 22, 2017, at 10:05, Bob Hinden wrote: > > > > a long time > > “Long” as in “Since RFC 753, Jon Postel, March 1979”. > > Grüße, Carsten > --0-1322427983-1498144957=:29272 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --0-1322427983-1498144957=:29272-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Thu Jun 22 16:20:34 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F24CC12949E for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:20:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.203 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x3eBKEAe7W8n for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:20:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D6F8127977 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:20:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CA1AB80D27; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:20:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AB83B80D27 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:20:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iYolCgZff6hG for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:20:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56DF3B80D26 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:20:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7C081CA514 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:20:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q_zBv-d4OsIv for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:20:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MacBook-Pro.local (c-50-159-75-65.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [50.159.75.65]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BF53D1C9AD2 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:20:10 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:20:28 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Author line oddity in citations X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 6/22/17 12:53 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: > Hi, > > I just noticed that the author line in citations has an oddity, in the sense that the name format is "Lastname, I." for all but the last author, where it is "I. Lastname." > > [RFC5681] Allman, M., Paxson, V., and E. Blanton, "TCP Congestion > Control", RFC 5681, DOI 10.17487/RFC5681, September 2009, > . > > Is this on purpose, e.g., following some common citation style? Just feels odd. > Yes, on purpose. Basically follows CMOS. -Heather _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Thu Jun 22 16:29:23 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06F6F127873 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:29:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=me.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p-JtlfzZZ85e for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:29:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49B30129B0A for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:29:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66316B80E79; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:28:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28FF6B80E79; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:28:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=me.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OuYyNtYGaLyc; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:28:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com (mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com [17.110.69.252]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B23B2B80E77; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:28:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process-dkim-sign-daemon.mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com by mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.38.0 64bit (built Feb 26 2016)) id <0ORY00K00Z6QTL00@mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com>; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 23:29:17 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=me.com; s=04042017; t=1498174157; bh=EQNIVciSo77fK7WMSgoMxzPtMV37laDukBsfWjCFPPk=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-id:MIME-version:Content-type; b=CLu5LO5Kt9iM/55jyKNOuZy7fbN/C70xvAtROHiHYPJc046RSEQjE9PhBDHUPsFIu TV10mtP5lI2jnzP8+5eeVMx6IajEuX10lXGFH3xvt4U9njh00DCEMXCN+gz3B0afQR 0/HY6X2o8uXikRTbA4r/knRkGi9bU7Kb6wrVhhH29M16Vhr7ivTgM1aRw0NjNLeole 0vyqKTk6Y9oxyuhBsrnrXWBoE3UvZGPidGkMX8/CAMVp62LK3Ompqtj4NnyhmoNRa7 3rM7pgqpyJCJyUr5fo9j+RcXGlHNbJ3sYff+y0Qf7SB79eN6M9JwBuYBjtetXznvPo bIu+sph2rnt5Q== Received: from icloud.com ([127.0.0.1]) by mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.38.0 64bit (built Feb 26 2016)) with ESMTPSA id <0ORZ00O312KQA020@mr11p00im-asmtp001.me.com>; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 23:29:15 +0000 (GMT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-06-22_09:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1034 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1701120000 definitions=main-1706220403 Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:29:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Ole Jacobsen To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" In-reply-to: Message-id: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.01 (OSX 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Author line oddity in citations X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Ole Jacobsen Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On Thu, 22 Jun 2017, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > Yes, on purpose. Basically follows CMOS. > > -Heather That's Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) not some transistor technology in case you are wondering Lars :-) Ole _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Thu Jun 22 16:55:13 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1757129B0A for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:55:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 54zQ9SwAR2Tj for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37D08127369 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58AE6B8168C; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:54:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB3FBB8168B for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:54:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ENnV4UsoHLuU for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:54:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a-painless.mh.aa.net.uk (a-painless.mh.aa.net.uk [81.187.30.51]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D756CB8168C for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:54:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a.8.0.e.1.a.3.0.f.a.3.3.d.6.c.e.1.0.0.0.f.b.0.0.0.b.8.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa ([2001:8b0:bf:1:ec6d:33af:3a1:e08a]) by a-painless.mh.aa.net.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dOBwG-0002hY-MG; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 00:55:06 +0100 To: Ole Jacobsen , Carsten Bormann References: <4BCC2BBE-9BD1-48B5-90C4-9B9F6F035F1E@gmail.com> From: Elwyn Davies Message-ID: Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 00:54:34 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-GB X-Painless-Spam-Score: 4.6 Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Author line oddity in citations X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" , Bob Hinden Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1568019428589412203==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============1568019428589412203== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------776F19E7CA180EBD1C7F0441" Content-Language: en-GB This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------776F19E7CA180EBD1C7F0441 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This is an oddity that has been brought up many times previously. Conclusion has always been that nobody (now) knows why we got this curious citation format. One theory was that it was just a mistake in some early RFC which was aiming at Chicago Manual of Style citations that use this format: > If there is more than one author, list the first person last name > first, add a comma, and then list the second person normally. Any name > that appears after the first name is always written first name first. > > Gilbert, Sandra M., and Susan Gubar. > and didn't obey the "Any name ..." clause correctly. Some heretics have claimed that St Jon made a mistake and the rest of us just followed the one true path..... and references were maybe not so verbose back then. AFAIK the format is unique to RFCs/Drafts. Cheers, Elwyn On 22/06/2017 16:22, Ole Jacobsen wrote: > The format is one of many used for citations. > > Wild guess: In the early days Jon Postel worked for a time at > SRI with Jake Feinler who was a librarian by training. It may > be that she suggested this format and it stuck. > > Useful tool developed by Henry: > > https://tools.ietf.org/tools/citation/ > > Use 1187 for your example, then change the string "{authors.rfclist}" > to "{authors.andlist}" and you'll get the more common format. > > > Ole > > On Thu, 22 Jun 2017, Carsten Bormann wrote: > >> On Jun 22, 2017, at 10:05, Bob Hinden wrote: >>> a long time >> “Long” as in “Since RFC 753, Jon Postel, March 1979”. >> >> Grüße, Carsten >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rfc-interest mailing list >> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --------------776F19E7CA180EBD1C7F0441 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

This is an oddity that has been brought up many times previously.  Conclusion has always been that nobody (now) knows why we got this curious citation format.  One theory was that it was just a mistake in some early RFC which was aiming at Chicago Manual of Style citations that use this format:

If there is more than one author, list the first person last name first, add a comma, and then list the second person normally. Any name that appears after the first name is always written first name first.

Gilbert, Sandra M., and Susan Gubar.

and didn't obey the "Any name ..." clause correctly.

Some heretics have claimed that St Jon made a mistake and the rest of us just followed the one true path.....  and references were maybe not so verbose back then.

AFAIK the format is unique to RFCs/Drafts.

Cheers,

Elwyn


On 22/06/2017 16:22, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
The format is one of many used for citations.

Wild guess: In the early days Jon Postel worked for a time at
SRI with Jake Feinler who was a librarian by training. It may
be that she suggested this format and it stuck.

Useful tool developed by Henry: 

https://tools.ietf.org/tools/citation/

Use 1187 for your example, then change the string "{authors.rfclist}"
to "{authors.andlist}" and you'll get the more common format.


Ole

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017, Carsten Bormann wrote:


On Jun 22, 2017, at 10:05, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> wrote:

a long time

“Long” as in “Since RFC 753, Jon Postel, March 1979”.

Grüße, Carsten



_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

--------------776F19E7CA180EBD1C7F0441-- --===============1568019428589412203== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============1568019428589412203==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sun Jun 25 01:57:10 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0498E129564 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 01:57:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xLPec_GxcoLl for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 01:57:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30BBE128B4E for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 01:57:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E18B81D60; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 01:56:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07602B81D60 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 01:56:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n8DDvmU1NZO8 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 01:56:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2165B81D5E for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 01:56:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (c213-89-111-155.bredband.comhem.se [213.89.111.155]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 03855180155A for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 10:57:00 +0200 (CEST) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <4bb44574-a687-45f3-3ba2-9f6b6a0696cb@pi.nu> Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 10:56:57 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Author line oddity in citations X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" Heather, inline please. On 2017-06-23 01:20, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > On 6/22/17 12:53 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I just noticed that the author line in citations has an oddity, in the sense that the name format is "Lastname, I." for all but the last author, where it is "I. Lastname." >> >> [RFC5681] Allman, M., Paxson, V., and E. Blanton, "TCP Congestion >> Control", RFC 5681, DOI 10.17487/RFC5681, September 2009, >> . >> >> Is this on purpose, e.g., following some common citation style? Just feels odd. >> > > Yes, on purpose. Basically follows CMOS. I've looked at CMOS, and can't find the style you are referring too, can you send me a link? /Loa > > -Heather > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest > -- Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sun Jun 25 13:26:15 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 740D4126CD6 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:26:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.89 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O0ZB8qRSYPf0 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:26:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9F2E126BF0 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:26:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D03FB80EC4; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:25:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8115B80EC4 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:25:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qd8PkhPD6FFA for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg0-x235.google.com (mail-pg0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::235]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 869B6B80EC3 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg0-x235.google.com with SMTP id u62so39774227pgb.3 for ; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:26:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6NT2K3rshMsvN4OtOT2Dwed6YGGwTisbuq+uQPW3l50=; b=FMKR/H2sfAVJP672uFHnWN464d9rL0kObaZFE7ow6UbCK6XKFWVW9LbhUTkKnvjG85 ChhbAsi4+8LbchSv7mJP7VctwC5T2HeSKSxwe2cM1c622gN6BDJm0V+fTQwW2DrLjJED 7kXl/NusCrrrjEqsL2FOUlyHNLW2oyYJ3Wg53VmDxmmPe3U6wsDaYpJnE/N1vteMmCE6 0G8Rfn/7XbKECFh1bAOUkIBgG414l3p+Bbys4eDR7spo85CgL00cwY2P8iEDdMEDwq4y lPkUK+aGRx4Q1OAPibq83sGe4odtx6UG5pB2iQaQbGu9H6qBzRFE+n1GSsBCn7rJ41kO Y29g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6NT2K3rshMsvN4OtOT2Dwed6YGGwTisbuq+uQPW3l50=; b=b1luw2wLeL2Y9cFOYyJHV2yZnIPGNOLknklGtZ8LlAMKa6+6rRtKAB6eEz+PZ2SNVv i91IVx+cnlp7qOoPDfADVqNGzcWm9ViRG7EOmnWnZwBvdTVQxx2LZRoZoDag/km2cA68 mrwOFKqtA2KJ2QVH+ItVohXKOW1ExbQSYYiBJ/4fG/sSrlrV2H/qDq8ocbsai3EYxmdm D3dJPVUGP567Ad+bn7PLWC59tQCwpKOxH5d9GlyjmbkcTAObQFmqzHlmblMWtgO3XlUw FyQZeGclCrXNPhsMbXI8rxjsVUf3QoB+xb9ZRxbQDLj6AvYPgMoiJbED6YZnItkyTpQ1 SRmQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOy2FyOqZae16FzEiQv3RvyDhnR1x7sislbWQ0niqqEcvY7+psqL LnSGQkMhCW15uxXI X-Received: by 10.84.236.1 with SMTP id q1mr20584219plk.187.1498422368937; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:26:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.21] (28.216.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.216.28]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m68sm13561629pfi.12.2017.06.25.13.26.06 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:26:08 -0700 (PDT) To: Loa Andersson , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <4bb44574-a687-45f3-3ba2-9f6b6a0696cb@pi.nu> From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 08:26:06 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4bb44574-a687-45f3-3ba2-9f6b6a0696cb@pi.nu> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Author line oddity in citations X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" Loa, I do wonder myself why we use this style instead of the simpler style used by IEEE and ACM, but this goes back a long way (RFC793 for example) so it would be a bit strange to change it now. As for CMOS, I think it must depend on the edition. Some sources suggest "Deans, Graeme K., Fritz Kroeger and Stefan Zeisel" rather than "Deans, Graeme K., Kroeger, Fritz and Stefan Zeisel". Also see http://www.press.uchicago.edu/books/turabian/turabian_citationguide.html Regards Brian On 25/06/2017 20:56, Loa Andersson wrote: > Heather, > > inline please. > > On 2017-06-23 01:20, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >> On 6/22/17 12:53 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I just noticed that the author line in citations has an oddity, in the sense that the name format is "Lastname, I." for all but the last author, where it is "I. Lastname." >>> >>> [RFC5681] Allman, M., Paxson, V., and E. Blanton, "TCP Congestion >>> Control", RFC 5681, DOI 10.17487/RFC5681, September 2009, >>> . >>> >>> Is this on purpose, e.g., following some common citation style? Just feels odd. >>> >> >> Yes, on purpose. Basically follows CMOS. > > I've looked at CMOS, and can't find the style you are referring too, can > you send me a link? > > /Loa >> >> -Heather >> _______________________________________________ >> rfc-interest mailing list >> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest >> > _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Mon Jun 26 11:58:27 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77A3212EB45 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:58:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.091 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.091 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n0pF-RN6Swkd for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:58:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A852712EB43 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:58:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4817DB8188A; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:57:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 949B0B8188A for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:57:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jz5wx0NDE2sb for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:57:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ot0-x235.google.com (mail-ot0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::235]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF3C6B81889 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:57:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot0-x235.google.com with SMTP id u13so7464387otd.2 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:58:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=a/gWDcaP1DF+Bvirl1AMdzpbOfnWNDhbbPBjOdE1D7s=; b=RzfBy0KDOb3UKLDGSpXV8XzYV01F/qdPMu7YcD4UMpg7e6oEELGe7ATOFaPYWuiV4h 7R9IIeWF4gN749t9fKHRG44OriWCX6jnrMhTk/M0+86uh2pp0AxSeeABxFOAXY/j7hkq C27pQY9licKjXYZ568GiT0yHaHNfQ8cQwOEmZ4V2WyN2FoJMYoyScFl+H5iUUBFW2d5n IZuL4E8puVX7DFFCpmvmlDSrAzLJKQmTuEgEj4HFkz9iZWFSsP+1YkI4Eo2rggo2AxXt 92pJ/W6hqc6uOiX7CfbCogyDq6xqKDM+HNrkxZGR4z25Us1mz+gViezyX+QgdR8vnGP/ llng== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject :to; bh=a/gWDcaP1DF+Bvirl1AMdzpbOfnWNDhbbPBjOdE1D7s=; b=bFbf2kN6CaScX+UoJqdDTBeZZPHzl7oTBm0TpjqLK+h4WnstMg94RPx2FrzYbb+SUN QQpHZON6dq8mY2PdNGoAjZkJPHA5mI+EjBtXPjFUNxkbZWzd1hTOdpAFFrGsxwlfWHVA m0bayFfUjykbzv5PvgXaN0Mg1xD0GKBQTqzU2MNU4qwI7hh2jjOxzZV2ru7d/wZmBVZJ Ig3Z/8uGFpGi5mUvOdwa/+U6k5jODKS7MnGOk/i0RlLzhIgcThfoZ0LWyTavvh1mahmp ZJUJIk0tQ6zpftvKU10pmulUkO5eIT/y+3tPKz0Y6M20ZnqEXt+eERrucPJDL1JZQWR9 /lMA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOypw+mfw20YLDODsciy3/g3KTT3e5a+Ax1zesAMd5yYTg+pDjK/ UPSZo6eh9OeAgxYkRE4e1Y0LkjFU5w== X-Received: by 10.157.6.201 with SMTP id 67mr1087285otx.100.1498503500360; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:58:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.157.14.206 with HTTP; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:58:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Phillip Hallam-Baker Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 14:58:19 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: rTkjG47IZPhHQoiJru8m5dTLbbo Message-ID: To: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" Subject: [rfc-i] Where can I find a draft of the proposed stylesheet? X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6578947760014457778==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============6578947760014457778== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c11eca8d5731a0552e18868" --94eb2c11eca8d5731a0552e18868 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I am just redoing my Word/Markdown/XML to RFC tool and would like to revamp the HTML output. Does anyone have a link or a copy of the proposed IETF stylesheet? It doesn't have to be final, just want to get the right class etc. attributes output and get an idea of what the end result looks like. --94eb2c11eca8d5731a0552e18868 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I a= m just redoing my Word/Markdown/XML to RFC tool and would like to revamp th= e HTML output.
=
Does anyon= e have a link or a copy of the proposed IETF stylesheet? It doesn't hav= e to be final, just want to get the right class etc. attributes output and = get an idea of what the end result looks like.
--94eb2c11eca8d5731a0552e18868-- --===============6578947760014457778== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============6578947760014457778==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Mon Jun 26 12:07:43 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10B9112EB50 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:07:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q7zatXx0WDVe for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:07:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 806C3126C3D for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:07:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 451D4B818E4; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:07:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAD26B818E4 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:07:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6FEYR89RMc5o for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:07:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20B0EB818E3 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:07:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.84.68]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MLzXM-1dORpK1ukW-007ik0; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 21:07:34 +0200 To: Phillip Hallam-Baker , "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" References: From: Julian Reschke Message-ID: <36ae713e-82dd-4b33-b971-464c8a7f8c51@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 21:07:32 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:ZwPKoGacNebgI0nYxII2aEp6Ufc+yKTwRDF93WadyNu+ZMSsxwy S1EjVgGb5z2RUIV976df2Skk6GU7Sw/fVkPmvjGCIfT/WgjtFZIZQ70va2UQRWcLzYVCP8x A+atwlDIIhzpg2T165UNA1DsRUJ2jUS5FTgmI9An6Kqp2zrwMjqnPMbcu0kwQDN52aAoUlX ++JxTMJFqcYtxzm7MDVOg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:jA5kOPxIbyw=:9Y4P8hv8LfptwvJvCOehVb bGQcq/YQDF0YbUF1tRbNdO0vO/y90K11FlWa7omh6aUAQe9euqsBYwla85sU7YtkvOTWXTmrw 3IrowpbENlQqdd01WiTmCzG/trPUZOwcbdpNlgnfxfVZLnilo8w/EJaYLS0vLcuHMZnCMeuH7 3TCYdeo5CdogbBCb0Y01RBJKXV3MAmx3PY3jfHuu2RMRn19B2/hXGQ8DtqOSGINDkcaUQuj/9 i+QjsD/0H+2PDB2q/88l89hEv0wyT69o+DRFMKUNcBb9OGPQmT6zTU5djXKK7sh976yuTZDXF 5Tys0VVLiPQtSkkxxm8j4fAZdC1tyu3u09uROvrI3Yh1/JTfiTnm1AYIfSztczKJV3C6SSTQD XMjzSkNgmnAMG8CSBohPWRLskBigL3yEjTYJ3a9+9iu1bztKR7HhCgCtPcVgt4AdLVX4sk7DC cPtXIsl7W7SPFtILwvBYtWEdhBb2gQvrXEqBKn1HfNTQoImlsEIQ5ZBNrkClCX325KpzBa3YN q8HAWIL07p34LolCQwm12kokh3f8/V17C5EjIUshNRxANzSEUChHsgjIvH+yCYoUeqgE9bIoB XvlXCMkdN/vxP++c+ugSh0+o3FfQsI33bhdw8XpyBWVBfB25Oi4PgE6wTeksM9MjNQOPya4a7 RXU+XXwG6H9WDXS8B0U1Hus0ZbV5yPbSTOVoMt5FRW5Zze5af1WM+XoJnJq8HLOppA6CrRtBO JGsPdxDdZNzP8/VDPLr7gQ2yz0r4f5Gh2OPYrItNtDUBVBDkIzl7OuE0aUKZ52Ryq26gK6llp P7kAPm9 Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Where can I find a draft of the proposed stylesheet? X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 2017-06-26 20:58, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > I am just redoing my Word/Markdown/XML to RFC tool and would like to > revamp the HTML output. > > Does anyone have a link or a copy of the proposed IETF stylesheet? It > doesn't have to be final, just want to get the right class etc. > attributes output and get an idea of what the end result looks like. , I think... _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Mon Jun 26 12:56:51 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 625EE12EB55 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:56:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.091 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.091 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EMfTQWe4JzWR for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:56:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B61F12EB4F for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:56:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5EE0B8111D; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:56:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C210B8111D for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:56:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6IvH3AIuTO0B for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:56:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ot0-x22a.google.com (mail-ot0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::22a]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B583B8111C for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:56:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id y47so8577243oty.0 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:56:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=Qj/+Ei59MEnEgarxKNMZMbPSoOpWqMGvcX71L03f5w8=; b=keZWasmv6VfxdF1vF97rfbqdX94yBe71nR5bxggyUpLCad+WdAKj3VGUOU0p0/XHsS OGOZcAHY50aTEY0SwDoN+w1Zjyi5VPUL/wBHjjb1lOP9JDKK/aNtltqM+m4d3VTwTkTw y3DbofOVKhYrDL2yNkDUoWT1P0pdAKgLB3VJRszD1XfEYIkpFCOkAv2rUXlFrYAm204g 51jkscUhHsK/7lNPEerkCUsD5dfM9v20chY/y18vP+14OslHyqkkCdKuD0M4wqo6gjvL 4DWqjq/qYmUCUAqkmQVViN8ACazEhPCk4t3UPY5dyweZbAfEmo2T/1kLBadnRmbWISm7 3R2g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Qj/+Ei59MEnEgarxKNMZMbPSoOpWqMGvcX71L03f5w8=; b=RtkcStNJTAFT9FppVwrfqPPCvqR8P9vAfR6eQPDWiQQm3LoVkj82YCWnwTYR1pQhIF TUZ9LBei3tlq5XtU6wRBHJnLNoEG5ytRtbhem9hQutWKnBl7OqDFBPjCne8cODzeYSjt DVAHy3c96Tuq9hBI3K+U4n5LBD/jPEV02QHdG1cie+Te5YLC09xsjzuJoxtbRQFO8m8p BOygRpl9jmCr2pRbThsx1R++kQ639QLGk2kopsXumqNlv35vJM5QFPik+rbBfCh5Eimn ch1C2wpbLF4R3hrH/WFBiUiGxRb33TgSEMrBsSdWX+CxMxAh8BMAhC9vk5I8+aK5W0cZ P0wA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOwXJ2f3ynmG6Ut4fX+Nk9/ZmR5NP4H3DsDIt6ej538FPmMRQ8Z6 2y+ynblO4EX919v+S/bhFwa4etStlQ== X-Received: by 10.157.22.230 with SMTP id s35mr1228800ots.112.1498507005831; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:56:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.157.14.206 with HTTP; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:56:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <36ae713e-82dd-4b33-b971-464c8a7f8c51@gmx.de> References: <36ae713e-82dd-4b33-b971-464c8a7f8c51@gmx.de> From: Phillip Hallam-Baker Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 15:56:45 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: jhi9H9xOTucRr_e5X6fFJa-1DKg Message-ID: To: Julian Reschke Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Where can I find a draft of the proposed stylesheet? X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1760402382116934886==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============1760402382116934886== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113ef420c6b0980552e259b7" --001a113ef420c6b0980552e259b7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Thanks. I am working on getting it in sync with my tools. One thing I think we probably should have in the final style is the IETF logo if it is an RFC and a watermark saying DRAFT for IDs. That can be done through the script though. Internet draft should be distinguished in machine readable manner: for draft ??? The navigation anchors seem wrong to me. The fragment identifiers refer to the current document by default. These have hardcoded links to a particular version. That will make reading documents offline a pain. It would also cause all the docs to break if the RFC editor reorganizes the Web site. Should be: On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2017-06-26 20:58, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > >> I am just redoing my Word/Markdown/XML to RFC tool and would like to >> revamp the HTML output. >> >> Does anyone have a link or a copy of the proposed IETF stylesheet? It >> doesn't have to be final, just want to get the right class etc. attributes >> output and get an idea of what the end result looks like. >> > > , I think... > --001a113ef420c6b0980552e259b7 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tha= nks.=C2=A0

=
I am working o= n getting it in sync with my tools.=C2=A0

One thing I think we probably should have in the final sty= le is the IETF logo if it is an RFC and a watermark saying DRAFT for IDs. T= hat can be done through the script though.

Internet draft should be distinguished in machine readabl= e manner:

<= /div>
<html class= =3D"ID"> for draft ???

The navigation anchors seem wrong to me. The fragment identifier= s refer to the current document by default. These have hardcoded links to a= particular version. That will make reading documents offline a pain. It wo= uld also cause all the docs to break if the RFC editor reorganizes the Web = site.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a class=3D"selfRef" href=3D&qu= ot;https://rfc-format.github.io/draft-iab-rfc-css= -bis/sample3-v2.html#n-status-of-this-memo">

Should be:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 &= lt;a class=3D"selfRef" href=3D"#n-status-of-this-memo"&= gt;




On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 3:= 07 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
=
On 2017-06-26 20:58, Philli= p Hallam-Baker wrote:
I am just redoing my Word/Markdown/XML to RFC tool and would like to revamp= the HTML output.

Does anyone have a link or a copy of the proposed IETF stylesheet? It doesn= 't have to be final, just want to get the right class etc. attributes o= utput and get an idea of what the end result looks like.

 <https://rfc-format.github.io/draft-iab-r= fc-css-bis/>, I think...

--001a113ef420c6b0980552e259b7-- --===============1760402382116934886== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============1760402382116934886==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Mon Jun 26 19:21:05 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71EC6127A91 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:21:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p48jEbYjNeZR for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:21:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86D04126CBF for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:21:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC4CEB81931; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:20:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8EEAB81931 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:20:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YU8FtEUYWumz for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:20:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ot0-x236.google.com (mail-ot0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::236]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24850B81930 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:20:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot0-x236.google.com with SMTP id 95so13251081ott.3 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:20:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=IoVqJJN1BI9qzzwtivHEfKtYS91ZaU294k66U6FgopM=; b=cuFRtVUsKcIWuORxwDhXMt+XlCyxTc9zL6OvsP0nXJfavET864eg+4QCBWXEz+jftn oZ/a7LHo/KWK9UClVSh7A1yEtiBqbgqu0zCUAg3SOm3p9BbrYP55MFhcd8AckqsLVv2v fuptDDQa7aeZV2HTi1GCBMQFPtNZGsCRtDIjNoNgX3vId5kIgOIRd95e+52seZnD35VG d7z0iGEnVd2S1F94ECU1srMVpXk46WmMxM8UEFnwTQ/AU1UBh6GGNNQfh7dJbhhtzZFV VcjUKmgMKD5zAxgtcAaZn1FWz1Qg42p6ywwGdB/9tNGdTd/H5TTGDFobCyh3BgvrVgEz O+VA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=IoVqJJN1BI9qzzwtivHEfKtYS91ZaU294k66U6FgopM=; b=BA349qGI921za0tIPG2lg6KorTeG0t+8GuDpB4diqTj2i77LIDS7rVH/w+ugszbZXG rrszdCIr0HMeReU2/zM4xJkd1GpC0b4rbJ0h1oSsoPrgQSzKk0K2Fz+PGMQw4gP2+AnS grB9QA+UjW7BneaMbgQmqXOWHjGDiFF4IEykCI3W9vcqOGowQkyFEom3Q5faVejUUP45 BS3NwEhXaM/7nNq8Wg2lgjpVtaYhSroNYfLCxIYDpWy2gVBeLO5CwzqSXLJmLa8b7MCx YlXmvTKA2IluEPLi2BGiKCDSlJAMQBorMYsLdGhPhZBbjJjKX4GSk57vfMEOMn8GdXDR 043g== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOyL8QgJGtTVsur7JhLu8ZB7NIk5Q7+dVH+yfuSKnQPwsCXhSBZK FNLRDoseDx/fZEQ8XKImeHB933i1fg== X-Received: by 10.157.34.85 with SMTP id o79mr1887971ota.214.1498530059297; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:20:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.157.14.206 with HTTP; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:20:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <36ae713e-82dd-4b33-b971-464c8a7f8c51@gmx.de> From: Phillip Hallam-Baker Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 22:20:58 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: JdTk7Owf_nW7HpR3144R6FTNEY8 Message-ID: To: Julian Reschke Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Where can I find a draft of the proposed stylesheet? X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org" Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0907865846770391013==" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" --===============0907865846770391013== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113c239edea9a30552e7b700" --001a113c239edea9a30552e7b700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Ignore the thing about the absolute URLs. For some reason Chrome decided to normalize everything when it saved the doc, agg! On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > Thanks. > > I am working on getting it in sync with my tools. > > One thing I think we probably should have in the final style is the IETF > logo if it is an RFC and a watermark saying DRAFT for IDs. That can be done > through the script though. > > Internet draft should be distinguished in machine readable manner: > > for draft ??? > > The navigation anchors seem wrong to me. The fragment identifiers refer to > the current document by default. These have hardcoded links to a particular > version. That will make reading documents offline a pain. It would also > cause all the docs to break if the RFC editor reorganizes the Web site. > > > > Should be: > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Julian Reschke > wrote: > >> On 2017-06-26 20:58, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: >> >>> I am just redoing my Word/Markdown/XML to RFC tool and would like to >>> revamp the HTML output. >>> >>> Does anyone have a link or a copy of the proposed IETF stylesheet? It >>> doesn't have to be final, just want to get the right class etc. attributes >>> output and get an idea of what the end result looks like. >>> >> >> , I think... >> > > --001a113c239edea9a30552e7b700 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ign= ore the thing about the absolute URLs. For some reason Chrome decided to no= rmalize everything when it saved the doc, agg!

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 3:56 PM, P= hillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> wrote:
Thanks.=C2=A0

I am working on getting it in sync with my tools.=C2=A0

One thing I think we probably= should have in the final style is the IETF logo if it is an RFC and a wate= rmark saying DRAFT for IDs. That can be done through the script though.

Internet draft should be dis= tinguished in machine readable manner:

<html class=3D"ID"> for draft ???

The navigation anchors seem wrong to= me. The fragment identifiers refer to the current document by default. The= se have hardcoded links to a particular version. That will make reading doc= uments offline a pain. It would also cause all the docs to break if the RFC= editor reorganizes the Web site.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a class=3D= "selfRef" href=3D"https://rfc-format.github.io/draft-iab-rfc-css-bis/sample3-v2.h= tml#n-status-of-this-memo">

Shoul= d be:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a class= =3D"selfRef" href=3D"#n-status-of-this-memo">
<= div>



On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Julian Reschke <<= a href=3D"mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de" target=3D"_blank">julian.reschke@gm= x.de> wrote:
On 2017-= 06-26 20:58, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
I am just redoing my Word/Markdown/XML to RFC tool and would like to revamp= the HTML output.

Does anyone have a link or a copy of the proposed IETF stylesheet? It doesn= 't have to be final, just want to get the right class etc. attributes o= utput and get an idea of what the end result looks like.

 <https://rfc-format.github.io/draft-iab-r= fc-css-bis/>, I think...


--001a113c239edea9a30552e7b700-- --===============0907865846770391013== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest --===============0907865846770391013==-- From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue Jun 27 05:40:56 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE0C5129ADE for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:40:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1mxJEy7PdoCX for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:40:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39E15120724 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:40:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B55FB813C2; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:40:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0942DB813C1 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:40:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qqmr6RSVR4xT for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:40:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A2E0B813C0 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:40:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D21421CA588 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:40:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nB0Y1_Cgw7Zm for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:40:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Heathers-MBP.jetpack (unknown [IPv6:2600:100f:b12d:b176:ce6:213b:2f43:b95]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 628381CA547 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:40:27 -0700 (PDT) To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <4bb44574-a687-45f3-3ba2-9f6b6a0696cb@pi.nu> From: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:41:10 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Author line oddity in citations X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" On 6/25/17 1:26 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Loa, > > I do wonder myself why we use this style instead of the simpler style > used by IEEE and ACM, but this goes back a long way (RFC793 for example) > so it would be a bit strange to change it now. Also, changing it has implications for a number of tools. I'm not sure the effort is worth it in this case (but am happy to hear other opinions). > > As for CMOS, I think it must depend on the edition. Some sources > suggest "Deans, Graeme K., Fritz Kroeger and Stefan Zeisel" > rather than "Deans, Graeme K., Kroeger, Fritz and Stefan Zeisel". > > Also see http://www.press.uchicago.edu/books/turabian/turabian_citationguide.html What Brian said. -Heather > > Regards > Brian > > On 25/06/2017 20:56, Loa Andersson wrote: >> Heather, >> >> inline please. >> >> On 2017-06-23 01:20, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >>> On 6/22/17 12:53 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I just noticed that the author line in citations has an oddity, in the sense that the name format is "Lastname, I." for all but the last author, where it is "I. Lastname." >>>> >>>> [RFC5681] Allman, M., Paxson, V., and E. Blanton, "TCP Congestion >>>> Control", RFC 5681, DOI 10.17487/RFC5681, September 2009, >>>> . >>>> >>>> Is this on purpose, e.g., following some common citation style? Just feels odd. >>>> >>> >>> Yes, on purpose. Basically follows CMOS. >> >> I've looked at CMOS, and can't find the style you are referring too, can >> you send me a link? >> >> /Loa >>> >>> -Heather >>> _______________________________________________ >>> rfc-interest mailing list >>> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest >>> >> > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest > _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Wed Jun 28 01:09:19 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EE0812EBF5 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 01:09:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IPJyojchJsNc for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 01:09:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFD6312EB78 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 01:09:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4DFCB80062; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 01:08:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 569B0B80062; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 01:08:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7jgrA2XFLACD; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 01:08:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 198A1B8005C; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 01:08:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (c213-89-111-155.bredband.comhem.se [213.89.111.155]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 630C9180155A; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 10:09:10 +0200 (CEST) To: "Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor)" , rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <4bb44574-a687-45f3-3ba2-9f6b6a0696cb@pi.nu> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <24a32597-8d22-3cae-4247-ea8dd4c4cf7a@pi.nu> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 10:09:06 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Author line oddity in citations X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" Heather and Brian, On 2017-06-27 14:41, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: > On 6/25/17 1:26 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> Loa, >> >> I do wonder myself why we use this style instead of the simpler style >> used by IEEE and ACM, but this goes back a long way (RFC793 for example) >> so it would be a bit strange to change it now. > > Also, changing it has implications for a number of tools. I'm not sure > the effort is worth it in this case (but am happy to hear other opinions). While I think the format: "Deans, Graeme K., F. Kroeger and S. Zeisel" would be fine for RFCs, I was more interested to know why we use the format we use. /Loa > >> >> As for CMOS, I think it must depend on the edition. Some sources >> suggest "Deans, Graeme K., Fritz Kroeger and Stefan Zeisel" >> rather than "Deans, Graeme K., Kroeger, Fritz and Stefan Zeisel". >> >> Also see http://www.press.uchicago.edu/books/turabian/turabian_citationguide.html > > What Brian said. > > -Heather > >> >> Regards >> Brian >> >> On 25/06/2017 20:56, Loa Andersson wrote: >>> Heather, >>> >>> inline please. >>> >>> On 2017-06-23 01:20, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >>>> On 6/22/17 12:53 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I just noticed that the author line in citations has an oddity, in the sense that the name format is "Lastname, I." for all but the last author, where it is "I. Lastname." >>>>> >>>>> [RFC5681] Allman, M., Paxson, V., and E. Blanton, "TCP Congestion >>>>> Control", RFC 5681, DOI 10.17487/RFC5681, September 2009, >>>>> . >>>>> >>>>> Is this on purpose, e.g., following some common citation style? Just feels odd. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, on purpose. Basically follows CMOS. >>> >>> I've looked at CMOS, and can't find the style you are referring too, can >>> you send me a link? >>> >>> /Loa >>>> >>>> -Heather >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> rfc-interest mailing list >>>> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest >>>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> rfc-interest mailing list >> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest >> > > _______________________________________________ > rfc-interest mailing list > rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org > https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest > -- Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Wed Jun 28 12:26:44 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ABDA129B75 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:26:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mMDSoP0HSVuF for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:26:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4FC21205D3 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:26:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 224F7B80CA2; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:26:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66798B80CA2 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:26:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LTSNvC0IwCuj for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:26:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from b-painless.mh.aa.net.uk (b-painless.mh.aa.net.uk [81.187.30.52]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 500EEB80CA0 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:26:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 0.c.1.3.f.2.7.3.9.f.e.0.7.b.d.6.1.0.0.0.f.b.0.0.0.b.8.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa ([2001:8b0:bf:1:6db7:ef9:372f:31c0]) by b-painless.mh.aa.net.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dQIbg-0001Ta-Ni; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 20:26:36 +0100 To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org References: <4bb44574-a687-45f3-3ba2-9f6b6a0696cb@pi.nu> <24a32597-8d22-3cae-4247-ea8dd4c4cf7a@pi.nu> From: Elwyn Davies Message-ID: <238bda7c-65e2-86be-10cb-1572acdab30b@folly.org.uk> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 20:26:25 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <24a32597-8d22-3cae-4247-ea8dd4c4cf7a@pi.nu> Content-Language: en-GB X-Painless-Spam-Score: 4.9 Subject: Re: [rfc-i] Author line oddity in citations X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Sender: "rfc-interest" Previous attempts to find a rational explanation for the strange format have never identified either a formal specification of the format in IETF archives or any oral history of why we ended up this way. The best we can do is the cock-up theory. Being at a bit of a loose end this afternoon, I had a ferret through the archives to see when this strange format first appeared. So far I have tied it down (probably) to between RFC 905 (May 1984) and RFC 1145 (February 1990). So far RFC 1145 is the earliest RFC that has an example (Ref 1) of the current IETF standard that I have found. RFCs 1146, 1158, 1160. 1161 and 1163 all have examples of the IETF format but interspersed are examples with the conventional Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) format. Several later RFCs around this time (RFCs 1162, 1179, 1185 and 1203) still use CMOS. However, there is no one consistent format for References sections and various formats were used, although Jon Postel and Joyce Reynolds used CMOS religiously at this time. Official blessing of the IETF format didn't come till RFC 2223 (October 1997) and then only implicitly - Section 9 of RFC 2223 says that its own reference section is 'canonical' and Ref [5] in RFC 2223 has 3 authors. So there is still no hard evidence of how the RFC 2223 format came into being and why it happened other than as a mistake possibly by Craig Partridge in RFC 1146. Incidentally, RFC 793 does not have any reference with more than 2 authors and conforms to both IETF and standard CMOS format. Regards, Elwyn On 28/06/2017 09:09, Loa Andersson wrote: > Heather and Brian, > > On 2017-06-27 14:41, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >> On 6/25/17 1:26 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>> Loa, >>> >>> I do wonder myself why we use this style instead of the simpler style >>> used by IEEE and ACM, but this goes back a long way (RFC793 for >>> example) >>> so it would be a bit strange to change it now. >> >> Also, changing it has implications for a number of tools. I'm not sure >> the effort is worth it in this case (but am happy to hear other >> opinions). > > While I think the format: > "Deans, Graeme K., F. Kroeger and S. Zeisel" > would be fine for RFCs, I was more interested to know why we use the > format we use. > > /Loa > >> >>> >>> As for CMOS, I think it must depend on the edition. Some sources >>> suggest "Deans, Graeme K., Fritz Kroeger and Stefan Zeisel" >>> rather than "Deans, Graeme K., Kroeger, Fritz and Stefan Zeisel". >>> >>> Also see >>> http://www.press.uchicago.edu/books/turabian/turabian_citationguide.html >>> >> >> What Brian said. >> >> -Heather >> >>> >>> Regards >>> Brian >>> >>> On 25/06/2017 20:56, Loa Andersson wrote: >>>> Heather, >>>> >>>> inline please. >>>> >>>> On 2017-06-23 01:20, Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) wrote: >>>>> On 6/22/17 12:53 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I just noticed that the author line in citations has an oddity, >>>>>> in the sense that the name format is "Lastname, I." for all but >>>>>> the last author, where it is "I. Lastname." >>>>>> >>>>>> [RFC5681] Allman, M., Paxson, V., and E. Blanton, "TCP Congestion >>>>>> Control", RFC 5681, DOI 10.17487/RFC5681, September 2009, >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>>> Is this on purpose, e.g., following some common citation style? >>>>>> Just feels odd. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes, on purpose. Basically follows CMOS. >>>> >>>> I've looked at CMOS, and can't find the style you are referring >>>> too, can >>>> you send me a link? >>>> >>>> /Loa >>>>> >>>>> -Heather >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> rfc-interest mailing list >>>>> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest >>>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> rfc-interest mailing list >>> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rfc-interest mailing list >> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest >> > _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest