----- Original Message -----
From: "Melinda Shore" <melinda(_dot_)shore(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
To: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 1:11 AM
We have the mailing list archives, we've got the document shepherd
writeups, we've got the IESG evaluation record, we've got the IESG
writeups, we've got meeting minutes, we've got jabber session
archives, we've got audio recordings of meetings, and we've got the
document history.
And it is not enough. A question arose recently as to why the wording in
an RFC was what it was, what it did intend to mean, and while I could
look at the different versions of the I-D and identify the nine month
period in which the change occurred, from the wording in an earlier RFC
to that in the replacement one, nothing else from that time gave any
clue as to why, nor could any remember. All we know is who was editing
the I-D at the time in question.
Most of the resources you mention are not available from the time in
question so we cannot judge how well we are currently being served until
at some point in the future they are put to the test. Likely, they will
be found wanting, as our older records have been.
Tom Petch
Melinda