Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 18-jan-04, at 23:17, grenville armitage wrote:
If it is important, it'll progress the work of some group in the
IETF and be archived as an RFC.
Really. What's the number for the GSE RFC again? Even current work such
as draft-ietf-idr-as4bytes-07.txt stays in draft limbo for years.
I suspect this speaks more to the focus of the authors of those documents
than any particular lack in the I-D development process. IMO, of course :)
Yes, that's a major problem. Organizations need to clean out their
clutter on a regular basis just like individuals do.
This argument is bogus as long as mailing list archives for stuff like
draft announcements are kept.
I don't quite see it that way. A mail list archive quite clearly conveys
the sense of "this is a snapshot in time of things in the past" whereas our
I-D repository has/had the semantics of "this is current thinking of someone,
somewhere in the IETF" (for current <= 6 months). So I believe in mail
archives far more than I believe in permanent I-D archives.
Searching in such an archive is only possible if you know the search
terms in advance. For instance, the draft I mentioned earlier isn't
easily found when searching for "32 bit as number".
I can't see how this would be improved by storing I-Ds in a well know,
permanent location. You'd still have trouble searching inside the archive
on ambiguous search terms.
I come from a LAN downunder.