On 1/6/2014 10:17 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
The process for adoption described in Section 2.1 is obsolete, as I
understand it. I believe the current process is to have the
authors/editors submit the -00 version to the tracker, and the tracker
will block publication until a WG co-chair approves. I also believe the
"replaced-by" step is now available via the tracker to WG chairs, so
there's no need to contact the secretariat.
I think this highlights the need for some documentation on the use of
the tracker, explicitly covering some specific scenarios such as this one.
The -adoption document is meant to focus on the working group side of
things.
So I'd wish that the portion of -adoption that gives sequences for the
tracker could, instead, simply cite a tracker document. The draft
provides detail about using the tracker only because there does not
appear to be any existing documentation to point to. (The only existing
document is an RFC that specifies requirements, not procedures.) And
just so there is no confusion: what is needed is more than a document
of individual functions; there needs to be instruction for accomplishing
common /sequences/. That is, how to combine the individual functions.
Absent that, here's the change to -adoption that covers what Murray has
highlighted:
1. Inform the working group of the intent.
2. Check for known IPR that needs to be disclosed, using some
technique like those described in [RFC6702]
3. Obtain working group rough consensus.
4. Choose document editors.
5. Pre-approve the document as an Internet Draft, using
[Approval].
6. Tell the editors to submit the -00 version of the document.
7. Request Secretariat to ensure that the Datatracker records
that the old internet-draft has been replaced by the new
working group draft.
8. Enjoy the ensuing working group discussion...
becomes:
1. Inform the working group of the intent.
2. Check for known IPR that needs to be disclosed, using some
technique like those described in [RFC6702]
3. Obtain working group rough consensus.
4. Choose document editors.
5. Authors/editors submit the -00 version to the tracker;
the tracker will block publication.
6. WG co-chair approves the draft to the tracker.
7. WG co-chair uses tracker "Replaced-By" featres, to indicate
that that the old internet-draft has been replaced by the new
working group draft.
8. Enjoy the ensuing working group discussion...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net