Subject: RE: [Techspec] New requirement for early permanent ID allocation

From: "Stephen Hayes (TX/EUS)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 10:39:10 -0600

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[email-masked]]
> I'm not sure we're in agreement. Let's assume that we switch
> contractors every two years. We can't have even the serial
> numbers (RFCxxxx for sake of argument) changing or resetting
> whenever we change contractor. So I think the IETF has to
> govern all types of identifier, including the basic document
> serial number.
> 
> > So a possible requirement is that the publisher only uses
> > identifiers as instructed by the IETF and not also allocate
> > them to a publisher defined series.
> 
> Yes. But I didn't get that from your previous paragraph.

I listed this as a possible requirement due to the implications. It means that there is no longer an overarching serial identifier like the current RFC series.  A serial identifier allocated by the IETF is insufficient since independent submissions do not go through the the IETF.  A serial identifier allocated by the publisher is insufficient since the IETF can request it not be allocated one of those identifiers.

Stephen

_______________________________________________
Techspec mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/techspec

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 16:26:56 -0500

--On Friday, 03 March, 2006 10:39 -0600 "Stephen Hayes (TX/EUS)"
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> I listed this as a possible requirement due to the
> implications. It means that there is no longer an overarching
> serial identifier like the current RFC series.  A serial
> identifier allocated by the IETF is insufficient since
> independent submissions do not go through the the IETF.  A
> serial identifier allocated by the publisher is insufficient
> since the IETF can request it not be allocated one of those
> identifiers.

And the solution, of course, is two identifiers, which is what
we have been doing for years, albeit badly for standards-track
documents (for reasons that are clearly out of TechSpec scope).

If there is a techspec requirement, I think it is that, if there
is a serial document identifier (and, IMO, dropping it would be
a terrible idea), the numbering system "belong" sufficiently to
the IETF that, if there is a change in publisher, the new one
can continue the numbers where the old one left off.  This does
_not_ require IETF management of the number space, consolidation
of document numbers with standards-identifiers (numbers or
otherwise), or any number of other too-complex possibilities.

     john