On 1/28/2004 8:15 PM, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
Conclusions, all mine:
- Documenting current procedures is good. - We won't expire tombstones.
They're not a big enough problem yet. - We'll think about naming
tombstones something else than the exact draft name (for instance
Just to make one thing clear
The published processing of expired Internet-Drafts was intended to be a
reasonably small change to existing procedures.
That's not to say that the procedures are going to live forever. But we
don't want to make bigger changes than we have to until we're ready
www.watersprings.org is helpful, if you know the draft name.
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 10:46:13PM +0100, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 14-jan-04, at 17:43, Fred Baker wrote:
It seems to me that there is a better approach to the above, at least
in the context of the above. If the tombstone is
A good and simple way to do this would be to create a file that matches
the draft filename without the version number (would this be that
tombstone thingy you guys keep talking about?) and say something like
version 34 was submitted 2003-04-05 or version 00 was deleted 1970-01-01
You can
The secretariat sent a note to ietf-announce this morning, which I mostly
consider a step forward - internet drafts will be aged out 185 days after
their original posting barring certain procedural caveats such as being on
a list waiting to be published.
I wonder what thoughts people have
Definitions:
draft name = filename stem, excluding version number (e.g.,
draft-iab-dos)
version number = two-digit I-D version number
filename = full filename, composed of draft name, version
number, and a format suffix (e.g.,
Hi Fred -
If I can have two separate files (a tombstone and a subsequent new file
version) that have the same name, as described in the recent announcement,
I am going to have to figure out a trigger that will tell me that I need to
re-download the file.
Incrementing the number also
One reminder for those who may not know...
For those mirroring IDs and/or RFCs, both the Secretariat and RFC
Editor support rsync. If you are still using ftp for the mirroring,
rsync has a lot to offer.
http://www.ietf.org/rsync-help.html
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rsync-help.html
Thomas
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Fred Baker wrote:
I'd be happier bumping the number any time the file is changed, so that the
tombstone supercedes the removed file and a subsequent posting supercedes
the tombstone.
Absolutely. Principals of version control are broken otherwise.
In the preferences
Fred Baker wrote:
At 09:56 AM 1/14/2004, James M Galvin wrote:
I had several conversations with Steve Coya about it back then and
pushed very hard to get that version number incremented for the
tombstone file. It would be silly (if not shameful) to take a step
backwards now.
I'm not sure it
On Wednesday, Jan 14, 2004, at 11:43 US/Eastern, Fred Baker wrote:
At 07:52 AM 1/14/2004, The IETF Secretariat wrote:
When an Internet-Draft expires, a tombstone file will be created
that includes the filename and version number of the Internet-Draft
that has expired. The filename of the
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 08:43:58AM -0800, Fred Baker wrote:
It seems to me that there is a better approach to the above, at least in
the context of the above. If the tombstone is literally as described, it
would be far more space/search/etc efficient for us to have the tombstone
consist
Baker
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Processing of Expired Internet-Drafts
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 08:43:58AM -0800, Fred Baker wrote:
It seems to me that there is a better approach to the above, at least in
the context of the above. If the tombstone is literally as described, it
would
On 14-jan-04, at 17:43, Fred Baker wrote:
It seems to me that there is a better approach to the above, at least
in the context of the above. If the tombstone is literally as
described, it would be far more space/search/etc efficient for us to
have the tombstone consist of an added text line in
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Fred Baker wrote:
I wonder what thoughts people have about this paragraph, though:
At 07:52 AM 1/14/2004, The IETF Secretariat wrote:
When an Internet-Draft expires, a tombstone file will be created
that includes the filename and version number of the
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 10:46:13PM +0100, Iljitsch van Beijnum allegedly wrote:
A good and simple way to do this would be to create a file that matches
the draft filename without the version number
I use a script that does: wget -k -nd -nH -r -np --glob=on -nc
--passive-ftp
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Fred Baker wrote:
I am very concerned about the accumulation of tombstones forever,
though. If we don't want to accumulate draft versions forever, what
makes tombstones different? I would far rather age them out after
some interval, such as six months.
I
17 matches
Mail list logo
