Subject: [xml2rfc-dev] Change request: Remove expiration dates from Internet-drafts

From: Richard Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 13:05:10 -0400

Hey xml2rfc devs,

tl;dr: Internet-drafts don't expire, so they shouldn't have expiration
dates.

AFAICT, there are no governing policy statements for Internet-drafts except
the practical statement that drafts don't expire; they're never deleted
from the database.  Which means that the expiration dates on I-Ds are a
bug.  The attached patch updates xml2rfc so that it no longer produces
expiration statements.

Please let me know how you would like to proceed.

--Richard

---

From: "Paul Hoffman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 10:33:45 -0700

This seems like an obvious end-run on the IETF process. Anyone is free 
to try to publish drafts that do not have expiration date on them, and 
then report back with their experiences.

--Paul Hoffman

---

From: Richard Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 14:01:52 -0400

What do you think the proper process is?

---

From: Richard Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 14:04:29 -0400

To elaborate: I'm submitting this here because I didn't see any other
process managing this sort of thing (as I said in my initial email).

As for submitting I-Ds without expiration dates -- I can't, because the
datatracker runs xml2rfc on my XML source to add the expiration date!

---

From: "Paul Hoffman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 11:13:46 -0700

> process managing this sort of thing (as I said in my initial email).

The decision for what constitutes an acceptable Internet Draft for IETF 
work is made by the IESG. You could start there, or just take it to the 
[email-masked] mailing list.

> datatracker runs xml2rfc on my XML source to add the expiration date!

What happens when you turn in Internet Drafts as text (not XML) that 
have no expiration date?

--Paul Hoffman

---

From: Richard Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 14:39:37 -0400

> [email-masked] mailing list.

Do you have a citation for this?  Or is this just your assumption / opinion?

> What happens when you turn in Internet Drafts as text (not XML) that

It's rejected due to idnits failing.  "** Missing expiration date.  The
document expiration date should appear on the first and last page."
However, in the absence of a governing policy document, it's just as
plausible that this is an idnits bug parallel to the xml2rfc bug.

--Richard

---

From: Jim Schaad <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 13:00:15 -0700

So this took me almost no time to find

https://www.ietf.org/ietf-ftp/1id-guidelines.html#expiry

From: xml2rfc-dev <[email-masked]> On Behalf Of Richard Barnes
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2018 11:40 AM
To: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [xml2rfc-dev] Change request: Remove expiration dates from Internet-drafts

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 2:13 PM Paul Hoffman <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> > wrote:

The decision for what constitutes an acceptable Internet Draft for IETF 
work is made by the IESG. You could start there, or just take it to the 
[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>  mailing list.

 

It's rejected due to idnits failing.  "** Missing expiration date.  The document expiration date should appear on the first and last page."  However, in the absence of a governing policy document, it's just as plausible that this is an idnits bug parallel to the xml2rfc bug.

--Richard

---

From: Richard Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 16:14:33 -0400

That is a document that states some requirements, but it's clearly not
governing policy.  The document says explicitly, "This document is for
helping authors. If you need the definitive rules, then read the following
documents", and proceeds to cite RFCs 2026, 5378, 3979, and 4879 -- none of
which have anything to say about drafts expiring.  It says "for the IESG",
but it is not listed in the same place as IESG statements on, say,
copyright or references [1][2].  It also has incorrect information in it,
for example the assertion that expired drafts are replaced by tombstones
(cf. [3]).

[1] https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/copyright.html
[2] https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/normative-informative.html
[3] https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-jennings-perc-double-01.txt

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 4:00 PM Jim Schaad <[email-masked]> wrote:

> *From:* xml2rfc-dev <[email-masked]> *On Behalf Of *Richard
> Barnes
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 15, 2018 11:40 AM
> *To:* Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
> *Cc:* [email-masked]
> *Subject:* Re: [xml2rfc-dev] Change request: Remove expiration dates from
> Internet-drafts
>
>
>

---

From: "Paul Hoffman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 14:42:00 -0700

> [3] https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-jennings-perc-double-01.txt

Given all that, it still seems like going to the IESG would cause better 
outcomes than by changing a tool and seeing what breaks.

--Paul Hoffman