Subject: Working documents repository

From: "Casati, Alessio (Alessio)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 10:06:58 +0100

It happens quite often that working documents
like the one  this folk is looking for get
forgotten simply because the standard process
works this way.

Still, there may be some interest (at least 
for historians:) to preserve documents that
otherwise would disappear.

Sometimes good ideas disappear with them.

Is it possible the IETF will keep a repository
of expired working documents? or is it a non
affordable cost?

I just note that in order to prevent the loss
of the "Two bits differentiated services architecture"
the authors submitted it as a non std track RFC.

Alessio

PS  there was an article about working documents
getting lost on an issue of IEEE Networks, 
and I share the concerns of its author.

> ----------
> From: 	G. Ensuque[SMTP:[email-masked]]
> Reply To: 	[email-masked]
> Sent: 	16 August 1999 09:46
> To: 	[email-masked]
> Subject: 	[MOBILE-IP] Wanted: old hierarchical FA draft
> 
> Hi all again
> 
> I would be extremely grateful if someone could send me the now expired
> draft
> by Charlie Perkins on Hierarchical Foreign Agents
> (draft-ietf-mobileip-hierfa-00) as I cannot
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> Guilhem Ensuque
> 
> Mobility Futures Unit                           [email-masked]
> B55-131B
> BT Advanced Communications Technology Centre
> Adastral Park, Martlesham Heath
> IPSWICH IP5 3RE                              Tel: +44 1473 645 232
> UK                                                   Fax: +44 1473 646 885
>

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 07:59:27 -0400

> of expired working documents? or is it a non

Some working groups collect all I-Ds and store them somewhere. (E.g., I
collect most AVT and SIP/RTSP-related drafts.) Also,
http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~hgs/netbib indexes the latest version of all
I-Ds, including expired ones. That way, you at least have the author
information and can try to contact the authors directly.

I assume that nothing would prevent organizations like normos
(www.normos.org) from performing this service. A simple database that
maps the fate of an I-D (published as RFC, expired, merged with draft X)
would limit the current problem that I-Ds get cited long after the RFC
has appeared.

As was mentioned before, conserving the drafts is also a useful service
for establishing prior work in patent disputes.

-- 
Henning Schulzrinne   http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~hgs

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 07:59:27 -0400

---

From: Marc Blanchet <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 11:40:23 -0400

>would limit the current problem that I-Ds get cited long after the RFC

speaking for normos, this is interesting to see this comment because we 
were thinking about doing this for our users and we are doing it. stay 
tuned! The way we are going to do is to completly seperate the expired 
draft archive so that they will be no confusion about the expired and 
non-expired draft. It is for us very important to clearly identify and tag 
the expired drafts.

Marc.

> > the authors submitted it as a non std track RFC.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Marc Blanchet			| [email-masked]
Viagénie inc.			| http://www.viagenie.qc.ca
3107 des hôtels		| tél.: 418-656-9254
Ste-Foy, Québec		| fax.: 418-656-0183
Canada, G1W 4W5		| radio: VA2-JAZ
------------------------------------------------------------
Internet Engineering Standards/Normes d'ingénierie Internet
                http://www.normos.org
------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Lloyd Wood <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 16:55:26 +0100 (BST)

On Mon, 16 Aug 1999, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:

> collect most AVT and SIP/RTSP-related drafts.)

Hmmm, in this context we can define the W3C as an IETF working group;
they've got every single web-related IETF draft submission available
from their server somewhere.

> Also,

That much is sensible.

> would limit the current problem that I-Ds get cited long after the RFC

If drafts were deliberately archived, 'expired' would be taken as much
notice of as 'standards track' and 'informational' generally are. We
could then look forward to expired drafts citing expired drafts citing
expired drafts, where ideas proliferate regardless of utility or peer
review.

> for establishing prior work in patent disputes.

Yes.

L.

<[email-masked]>PGP<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/>