Fred Baker wrote:
This document describes a process for managing a set of documents.
IMHO, it is a bit onerous; I may be ignorant, but I don't know how to
get an account on tools.ietf.org,
Really? I thought most WG chairs had one by now. There is a button to
click on the tools web site.
and I'm not sure that having ssh
access to the machine is necessary. Approaches used by common blogging
and wiki software seem sufficient for most practical purposes.
SFTP with a key pair is for protecting the main IETF web site. That is for
a very small club of people. As for tools server security, we just do what
Henrik tells us :-) But really, I found installing all this stuff trivial,
even on Windows.
Also, I seem to have managed to miss the fundamental set of reasons
that this is set up. RFC 4693 discusses having something less permanent
than and RFC and more referenceable than an internet draft. Well, ok,
but for what purpose?
For things like those currently held at
http://www.ietf.org/u/ietfchair/opNotes.html
(and that is a discusion of whether the RFC 4693 experiment
is useful; that discussion comes a year from now).
http://tools.ietf.org/html/<draft name>
<snip>
So internet drafts, however ephemeral we claim them to be, are
versioned and referenceable. I don't know that the final step (the RFC)
is any less permanent than the history we maintain of the drafts
leading up to it.
That's beside the point. This is nothing to do with RFC development.
This is for stuff that will (almost certainly) never be an RFC.
<snip>
In short, under what circumstances would I post an ION instead of an
internet draft?
If you were, for example, the maintainer of 1id-guidelines.
Anyway - again, this is an experiment, and yours are the questions
to be asked at the end of the experiment.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf