Subject: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Tools Team Report -- 30 June 2019

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 15:55:05 -0400

Tools Team Report -- 30 June 2019

1. Datatracker Projects
   - The plan was recently updated.
     -- https://trac.tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb/browser/trunk/PLAN
     -- The transition from Python 2 to Python 3 in under way.  This
        increased priority because Python 2 is being officially
        deprecated; it will not receive maintenance after the end of
        2019.
   - A contract for Meeting Application Improvements was awarded to
     IOLA.  Work will begin shortly.
   - A contract for IRSG balloting was awarded to AKAYLA.  Work began
     in June 2019.

2. Community & Other Projects
   - The Tools Team and the Secretariat worked out a plan for web site
     content involving static plaintext or PDF pages.  For pages with
     content that changes infrequently (such as appeals, appeal
     responses, and implementation reports) the Secretariat will load
     the pages into Wagtail content management system and update their
     index pages manually.  Agendas and Minutes for a body or committee
     will be captured in the Datatracker as meeting materials for that
     group.

3. RFC Services Projects
   - Support for the v3 schema has been enabled for I-D submission, and
     now the IESG needs to make a policy decision about when I-Ds in the
     new format can be submitted to the IESG for publication on the IETF
     stream.
   - The RFC Production Center continues to test the new format tools.
   - The Tools Team has a Statement of Work for the security of the
     tools used by the RFC Production Center.  The new format tools will
     be reviewed once the tools related to the old format are put in
     mothballs.
   - A contract for rendering errata in a more useful was awarded to
     Soaring Hawk Consulting; code was delivered.  The RFC Editor needs
     to figure out how it will be incorporated into rfc-editor.org.

4. Server Infrastructure
   - The custom DMARC-handling software was deployed for all mail lists
     in June 2018, but there is a desire to move away from the custom
     software to ARC.  The ARC software cannot be configured to handle
     just a few of our mail lists.  Requirements were provided to the
     ARC developers, but so far, they have not offered a release date.
     Alexey continues to try to get a response from the ARC developers,
     but so far we are only getting silence.  This has not changed in
     many months; maybe we will be using our custom code forever.
   - The guides.ietf.org has been deployed in its own container, and
     operational support is now being handled by the Secretariat.  This
     containerized deployment experiment was very successful.T

5. YANG Catalog
   - Operation of the yangcatalog.org was to transferred to the IETF
     Secretariat.  This is also running in a container on a sandbox
     server.  We expect deployment of the containerized version in a
     few weeks.

6. SustainIETF.org
   - This domain name will be transferred from ISOC to the IETF Trust.
   - It is not yet clear how this domain will be used going forward.

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 10:25:54 +0200

On 01.07.2019 21:55, Russ Housley wrote:
> ...
> ...

I'll repeat what I said two months ago:

> Sorry for being pedantic, but we currently have *three* different things
> that can be called v3:
>
> - the format defined in RFC 7991
> - the format defined in RFC 7991bis (abandoned for now)
> - what happens to be accepted by xml2rfc (which has implementation
> notes, but no proper specification)
>
> Best regards, Julian

I haven't seen any progress on this since then.

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 10:49:21 -0400

> On Jul 2, 2019, at 4:25 AM, Julian Reschke <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 

I understand, but these are not actions for the Tools Team.

Russ

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 17:08:26 +0200

> I understand, but these are not actions for the Tools Team.

Yes, but the tools report suggests that there is a well-defined thing
called "v3", and that is not correct. It would be helpful if the status
report would be more precise.

Best regards, Julian