Subject: Publishing call for discussion?

From: Martin Sustrik <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 18:58:51 +0200

Hi,

Is there a standard way to publish a "call for discussion" memo?

Searching though RFCs is seems there exists such type of document. For 
instance RFC 970 says:

"The purpose of this RFC is to focus discussion on particular problems
    in the ARPA-Internet and possible methods of solution.  No proposed
    solutions in this document are intended as standards for the
    ARPA-Internet at this time.  Rather, it is hoped that a general
    consensus will emerge as to the appropriate solution to such
    problems, leading eventually to the adoption of standards."

The goal is to initiate a discussion that would result either in "not 
relevant/suitable for IETF" or "subject handed to XYZ working group" or 
something similar.

Thanks and regards,
Martin

---

From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 19:21:35 +0200

> Is there a standard way to publish a "call for discussion" memo?

Yes, an internet-draft, perhaps containg prose such as "this draft is 
intended to initiate discussion. At this time, the author does not 
intend it to reach RFC status."

A little later, a "BOF session invitation" serves some of the same purposes.

Arnt

---

From: Martin Sustrik <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 19:31:59 +0200

> A little later, a "BOF session invitation" serves some of the same 

Thanks for the info. I'm reading the documents to figure out how IETF 
process works...

So basically, you write an I-D, send it to RFC editor. It gets 
published, people discuss it. Later on it expires and is removed.

Right?
Martin

---

From: Steven Bellovin <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 13:37:37 -0400

On Apr 18, 2010, at 1:31 59PM, Martin Sustrik wrote:

>> Yes, an internet-draft, perhaps containg prose such as "this draft is intended to initiate discussion. At this time, the author does not intend it to reach RFC status."
> Thanks for the info. I'm reading the documents to figure out how IETF process works...
> 
> So basically, you write an I-D, send it to RFC editor. It gets published, people discuss it. Later on it expires and is removed.

Not quite -- the RFC editor gets involved only when the decision has been made to publish it as an RFC.

You submit I-Ds via https://datatracker.ietf.org/idst/upload.cgi; as long as you meet the publication requirements (formatting, boilerplate, etc.) and don't name is as a working group draft without the consent of the chairs, publication is more or less automatic.  After it appears, I'd advise you send a message to the appropriate mailing list -- a WG list, for example -- pointing it out to people.

		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb

---

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 13:43:18 -0400

On Apr 18, 2010, at 1:37 PM, Steven Bellovin wrote:

>>> Yes, an internet-draft, perhaps containg prose such as "this draft  
>>> is intended to initiate discussion. At this time, the author does  
>>> not intend it to reach RFC status."
> You submit I-Ds via https://datatracker.ietf.org/idst/upload.cgi; as  
> long as you meet the publication requirements (formatting,  
> boilerplate, etc.) and don't name is as a working group draft  
> without the consent of the chairs, publication is more or less  
> automatic.  After it appears, I'd advise you send a message to the  
> appropriate mailing list -- a WG list, for example -- pointing it  
> out to people.
>

Dear Martin;

You should read the "Tao of the IETF."

Note that Internet Drafts ("I-Ds") are ephemeral - "publishing" just  
means "appears as a draft," and, yes, that's pretty automatic.

What most people think of as publishing is done when I-Ds become  
Requests for Comments (RFCs), and that is by no means automatic.

Regards
Marshall

>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>

---

From: Martin Sustrik <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 19:49:40 +0200

Steven, Marshall,

>> boilerplate, etc.) and don't name is as a working group draft without 
>> the consent of the chairs, publication is more or less automatic.  
>> After it appears, I'd advise you send a message to the appropriate 
>> mailing list -- a WG list, for example -- pointing it out to people.

Got it. Thanks for your help!

> You should read the "Tao of the IETF."

A did read it pretty carefully. AFAIR the process of publishing 
"informational memos" is not explicitely covered. Maybe it would make 
sense to add one sentence about the topic?

> Requests for Comments (RFCs), and that is by no means automatic.

I was asking specifically about ephemeral publication, so I've got the 
answer I was looking for.

Martin

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:03:21 -0700

>]Thanks for the info. I'm reading the documents to figure out how IETF process works...

The Toa of the IETF: <http://www.ietf.org/tao.html>

>So basically, you write an I-D, send it to RFC editor. It gets published, people discuss it. Later on it expires and is removed.

RFCs are never expired. And, unfortunately, they are often not discussed that much after they are published: people think they are sacrosanct.

So basically, you writ an I-D, get it published as an I-D, and you find an appropriate list that relates to the topic and tell folks about it.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 07:33:42 +0200

On 18.04.2010 19:37, Steven Bellovin wrote:
> ...
> ...

And, optimally, point out in the I-D where discussion should happen.

Best regards, Julian