ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: email reminders say when a draft expires, but not that you can't submit?

2015-10-22 03:14:06
---- Original Message -----
From: "Brian E Carpenter" <brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
To: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 8:21 PM
On 20/10/2015 18:58, l(_dot_)wood(_at_)surrey(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk wrote:
...
Drafts were expiring sometime on the 20th of October (in, one
presumes, the US, because no timezone was given, and the IETF is very
much a US organisation. I live in Australia, no timezone for expiry time
given on these emails.)

Agree that stating it precisely in UTC would not be a bad thing,
but...

So I refreshed the draft ready to do the necessary six-month
accounting.

...if the only reason to re-post a draft is the expiry, it isn't worth
reposting, IMHO. In fact it's a bit deceptive: people might think the
draft
is still under development when it isn't.

Brian,

Yes but ...

For most of the life of the IETF, it has been difficult or impossible to
get hold of an expired draft.  At some point, the web site started
making this possible, but I have never seen a commitment to doing so on
into the future; and so many good innovations just vanish, perhaps
because the world at large did not take them on.

So yes, I would encourage a refresh unless and until it is clearly
stated that the latest version of an I-D, no matter how long ago it was
posted, will remain available in perpetuity,

Tom Petch

Only to discover that I-D submission had already closed at midnight
UTC on the 19th because of the upcoming IETF meeting. Which wasn't
mentioned in the email.

Er, does it actually matter to anybody if the draft is refreshed with
the same content
and a different date two weeks later?

Why not state the earlier submission deadline as well as a hard
limit?

See previous comment.

   Brian