From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 11 20:10:21 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA02021; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:10:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bv3Fb-0007Cr-Rj; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:15:24 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv39r-0006P9-Aa; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:09:27 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv396-0006H9-09 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:08:40 -0400 Received: from av5-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (av5-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.112]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA01907 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:08:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by av5-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 540CF37EFD; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:08:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.182]) by av5-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4631F37E49 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:08:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28D2937E42 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:08:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bv38X-0002Il-GO for tools-team@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:08:05 +0200 Message-ID: <411AB4E3.6010905@levkowetz.com> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:08:03 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-team@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] Memory notes from TOOLS lunch meeting. X-BeenThere: tools-team@lists.ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e1b0e72ff1bbd457ceef31828f216a86 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Here are some notes from our lunch meeting. I've probably missed things, so feel free to supplement this if you note an omission. While waiting for Harald: * There are currently 2 issue tracking tools used within the IETF: RT and Roundup. RT is a more general ticket handling tool, while roundup is focussed on issue tracking in particular. Some WGs have RT issue trackers hosted here: http://rt.psg.com/ and some have Roundup issue trackers hosted here: http://mip4.org/issues/tracker/ and here: https://roundup.machshav.com/ The roundup tracker hosted at mip4.org has been modified to tie into WG mailing lists, so all comments on a particular issue on the list are added to the tracker, with smart abbreviation of long quoted parts of the message. * It will be interesting to hear from the tools developers within the w3c about which kind of tools they have found helpful, and which tools they have decided to use/develop. Lary has initiated contact about this, and Harald has asked (??? I forgot the name) to contact us about this, too. When Harald arrived, we covered (at least) the following: * Admin Restructuring Influence. The administrative restructuring announced by Harald yesterday influences the work of the tools team over the coming 6 months or so. The focus will be on tools for the secretariat. Tools implemented for the secretariat may have to be re-implemented for or by a new contractor at the beginning of 2005, and the tools team will be important in making this possible. * Open Source vs. Commercial We're not to be religious about this - if there exists a commercial tool which will do a job well, and we can get a preferrably free licence, we shouldn't re-develop an alternative tool. If there exists an open-source tool with comparable performance, that is to be preferred, however. We need to think about not again getting into the situation where administrative changes, internally or otherwhere, makes it necessary to replace, possibly re-develop, a tool we have already developed or adapted once. * Programmatic interfaces. Wherever possible and reasonable, we should prefer implementations which makes programmatic interfaces (in a wide sense) to the various tools available. As an example Harald mentioned the fact that the RFC editor is now making the list of RFCs available in XML format. After the general breakup I went over a few more points with Harald: * For the ID-submission tool, we should go forward by having the secretariat put together a list of their internal requirements, while we put together a list of our external (i.e. community) requirements. These can then be merged. * It is important for this tool and upcoming tools that the requirements come from both sides - secretariat and community. * It is OK and appropriate that Mike - the secretariat developer - is on the tools-team mailing list * I've talked with Gregory from the secretariat about setting up either a delegated "tools.ietf.org" or an area www.ietf.org/tools/ which we can access and control; with a preference for "tools.ietf.org". I will contact Gregory again about this during next week when he's back among the servers. * I'd like us to set up a central page which lists and provides access to all available tools in use within the community - things like xml2rfc, idnits, issue trackers, MIB compilers and extractors, ABNF checkers and whatnot. Best, Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 11 20:18:20 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA02353; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:18:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bv3NL-0007Is-6c; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:23:23 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv3Di-00071i-Ak; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:13:26 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv3BH-0006bP-Pi for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:10:55 -0400 Received: from av7-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (av7-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.109]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA02061 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:10:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: by av7-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 5BBE037EE3; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:10:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.182]) by av7-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D90637E43 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:10:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3072B37E44 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:10:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bv3Am-0002Oz-0D for tools-team@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:10:24 +0200 Message-ID: <411AB56E.60000@levkowetz.com> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:10:22 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-team@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] Tools teleconference minutes 11 Aug 2004 X-BeenThere: tools-team@lists.ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0cff8c3ec906d056784362c06f5f88c1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Below are brief minutes from the TOOLS teleconf. Please comment if I have missed something. Some of the action items don't have names - you're welcome to pick up one or more items. Henrik -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Agenda bashing Henrik wanted to add some questions regarding IETF servers, and the question of setting up a second public mailing list and web page for the team. Alex mentioned an additional tool class under 3.d, tools for WGs-to-be and BOFs, which are not yet chartered but might benefit from some tools nevertheless. Harald wanted to add a point regarding handling of feedback on, and improvement of, existing tools. 2. Comments on summary from Lunch meeting in San Diego No comments. 2.a Questions: * Access to ietf servers? Harald: Only sftp access has ever been given out, no shell accounts. So we should probably go for a delegated domain for the tools page. * Will the ietf servers be moved over physically, or will new servers be set up, and content moved over? Not clear at this point, a matter of negotiation. * If we put the tools pages on tools.ietf.org, who can provide a server? Harald has one tiny, Alex could provide hardware and T1 line but lacks experience in running one, Henrik has one with dual processors, dual power supply and raid disks. It was decided to have Henrik host this for now, we can move it later if a better possibility appears. Henrik will set up shell accounts and a web server area for the tools team to work in. * Mailing lists. Do we want an additional tools-discuss mailing list? Yes. This should be an open list, as opposed to tools-team@ietf.org which is closed. (The tools-team@ietf.org archives should however be publicly accessible). 3. First Steps - going over what we need to do first. After some discussion we had mentioned the following steps: * Start creating an inverntory of needed tools, grouped: a. Secretariat - Community interface b. WGs c. Authors d. Pre - WG * Solicit input from the community on the tools-discuss list. Note that we the coming 6 months or so primarily will focus on tools for the interface between secretariat and community. We will make this clear when soliciting community input, but need to be prepared to get ideas and proposals also for other tools. * Solicit requirements from the secretariat on their side of the requirements * Identify common tool components * Identify interfaces between tools, so they are accessible by other tools, not only by humans * Make sure that we have a reasonable data model for the tools we see coming, so we're not building on quicksand * Set down Requirements for ID-submission tool - Solicit secretariat's req's - Formulate community req's - Make sure there is reasonable tool interfaces - Make sure there is a reasonable data model * Prioritisation of tools to be handled after - Secretariat wants WG scheduling tool - ... What about handling of maintenance and improvements for existing tools? * Make a list of tools regarded as existing tools * Request community input on such tools on the tools-discuss mailing list. These are not necessarily the specific tool "Mailman", but rather such as Mailing list management in general Reminders to Chairs of passed milestone The Meeting Registration page - and others - we should try to cover both more and less obvious tools now in use. * Preferrably put these, and known issues with them, up on a wike. The secretariat's own list of tools are here, FYI: https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/show_tasks.cgi?mode=all How long will we take to put together a draft of tools and common components, and one on the ID-tracker requirements? In 3 weeks: draft of requirements and draft of needed tools out for review by the community. In 5 weeks - have community comments collected and worked into the requirements, hand over requirements to secretariat 4. Any other business The mailing list and web server questions scheduled here were handled under point 2.a above. 5. Action items: Alex will start the ID-submission tool draft. ??? A volunteer is needed for the Tools inventory, common components and prioritisation draft. Henrik will mail secretariat re. subdomain delegation Henrik will set up shell accounts and web area on his server Henrik will request creation of "tools-discuss@ietf.org" list Henrik will solicit requirements from the secretariat for the ID-submission tool ??? will start to put together a summary of existing tools, so we have it in hand when we announce the discuss list and solicit input on new and current tools. Alex will re-initialise the discussion on the tools-team@ietf.org list, as a continuation of the discussion about needed tools, components, requirements etc which was started before IETF-60, but temporarily put on hold. ??? As soon as we get the tools-discuss list up, draft an announcement to be sent on (my proposal here, should there be more/others?) these lists: ietf-announce wg-chairs (I'm not sure if this will happen before next meeting.) 6. Next meeting: Teleconference Wednesday 18 Aug, same time as today, same codes. Stas will assist people who wish to connect using SIP. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 11 20:18:23 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA02371; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:18:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bv3NN-0007J0-E3; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:23:25 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv3Di-00071n-Ee; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:13:26 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv3Bn-0006k3-DZ for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:11:27 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA02075 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:11:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av7-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.109]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bv3Gd-0007DK-AJ for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:16:28 -0400 Received: by av7-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id B674137EE8; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:10:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.182]) by av7-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A741237E43 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:10:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CB5037E45 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:10:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bv3BG-0002Qh-G2 for tools-team@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:10:54 +0200 Message-ID: <411AB58E.4000400@levkowetz.com> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:10:54 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-team@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: bb8eae9af85e4fcfe76f325e38493bf4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] Test X-BeenThere: tools-team@lists.ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8ac499381112328dd60aea5b1ff596ea Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please ignore _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 11 20:37:20 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA03267; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:37:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bv3fi-0007ZE-14; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:42:23 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv3Yv-0001pA-H7; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:35:21 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv3Vu-00010O-Kp for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:32:14 -0400 Received: from av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.112]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA03016 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:32:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: by av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 2626838397; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:31:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.178]) by av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15C7138394; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:31:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 096B838003; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:31:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bv3VO-0003Lf-Ni; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:31:42 +0200 Message-ID: <411ABA6E.9010008@levkowetz.com> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:31:42 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-team@ietf.org, tools-team@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] List posting address X-BeenThere: tools-team@lists.ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hm. The list info says that you should post to tools-team@lists.ietf.org, but it works just as well to post to tools-team@ietf.org. Furthermore, if you post to tools-team@lists.ietf.org, the mail still shows up with a To: header saying tools-team@ietf.org... I don't know why the longer address seems to be preferred. Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 11 20:37:24 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA03285; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:37:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bv3fn-0007ZN-3A; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:42:27 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv3Yv-0001pF-Kh; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:35:21 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv3Vv-00010Q-Mv for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:32:15 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA03019 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:32:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net ([81.228.9.112]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bv3al-0007VI-PF for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:37:17 -0400 Received: by av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 2626838397; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:31:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.178]) by av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15C7138394; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:31:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 096B838003; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:31:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bv3VO-0003Lf-Ni; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:31:42 +0200 Message-ID: <411ABA6E.9010008@levkowetz.com> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:31:42 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-team@ietf.org, tools-team@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] List posting address X-BeenThere: tools-team@lists.ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hm. The list info says that you should post to tools-team@lists.ietf.org, but it works just as well to post to tools-team@ietf.org. Furthermore, if you post to tools-team@lists.ietf.org, the mail still shows up with a To: header saying tools-team@ietf.org... I don't know why the longer address seems to be preferred. Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 12 00:04:28 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA13722; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:04:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bv6uD-0002SF-QW; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:09:34 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv6os-0002dv-RO; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:04:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bv6kb-0001d2-VD for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:59:37 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA13401 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:59:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-dark.research.att.com ([192.20.225.112] helo=mail-yellow.research.att.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bv6pU-0002LO-VW for tools-team@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:04:41 -0400 Received: from windsor.research.att.com (windsor.research.att.com [135.207.26.46]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B347A7B01 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:59:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.8.5) id i7C3x6L19475; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:59:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200408120359.i7C3x6L19475@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: tools-team@ietf.org Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:59:03 -0700 From: Bill Fenner Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.6d/makemail 2.10 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25 Subject: [Tools-team] Playing with zope/plone and friends X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581 I have plone running at http://fenestro.dyndns.org:8080/Test%20Plone%20Site/ I have roundup running under zope at http://fenestro.dyndns.org:8080/Goober%20Booties/ (Sorry for the stupid URLs. I tend to let my brain run freely when there's a text box to type into.) I plan to install zwiki next, to see if our conceptual WG tools environment could be mostly/all done in zope. Unfortunately, fenestro is behind a cable modem, so has nearly no uplink rate. Bill _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 13 08:47:15 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA12424; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:47:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BvbXu-0005wU-Gd; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:52:37 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BvbNL-0003Zx-RT; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:41:39 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BvbIj-0002X3-1f for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:36:53 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA11753 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:36:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-red.research.att.com ([192.20.225.110] helo=mail-white.research.att.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BvbNs-0005jU-OS for tools-team@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:42:13 -0400 Received: from windsor.research.att.com (windsor.research.att.com [135.207.26.46]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E03C51974B8 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:33:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.8.5) id i7DCaFc12118; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:36:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200408131236.i7DCaFc12118@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: tools-team@ietf.org Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:36:15 -0700 From: Bill Fenner Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.6d/makemail 2.10 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 Subject: [Tools-team] Poor zope/plone/roundup integration X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 1ac7cc0a4cd376402b85bc1961a86ac2 Looks like Roundup under zope looks just like Roundup not under zope - it's basically using zope to do web serving and that's it, not for providing a common look & feel or a common user database. I was hoping for tighter integration so that you could log into plone, look at some articles/downloads/whatever, then move over to Roundup seamlessly. As the tools are right now, they'd have to log in twice for that. Bill _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 13 10:15:16 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA18385; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:15:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BvcvA-0007TO-Aq; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:20:40 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BvcpZ-0007Wq-B3; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:14:53 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bvcmo-0006c3-Pl for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:12:02 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA17977 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:12:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exprod6ob4.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.214] helo=psmtp.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bvcrw-0007QP-FF for tools-team@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:17:24 -0400 Received: from source ([192.150.22.8]) by exprod6ob4.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 07:11:52 PDT Received: from inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-3 [153.32.251.51]) by smtp-relay-8.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7DEBUJI014980; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 07:11:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7DEBTkq006503; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 07:11:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 ([130.248.178.45]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I2E001OH1VB3Z@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 07:11:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 07:06:41 -0700 From: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] Playing with zope/plone and friends In-reply-to: <200408120359.i7C3x6L19475@windsor.research.att.com> To: "'Bill Fenner'" , tools-team@ietf.org Message-id: <0I2E001UT2353Z@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcSAIXir3qRyYSQUQ0WrIEK6EdOrugAyykng X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e5ba305d0e64821bf3d8bc5d3bb07228 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT I registered on your plone, but I couldn't register on Roundup -- Error: couldn't send email: (553, '5.1.8 ... Domain of sender address roundup-admin@your.tracker.email.domain.example does not exist', 'roundup-admin@your.tracker.email.domain.example') > > I have plone running at > http://fenestro.dyndns.org:8080/Test%20Plone%20Site/ > I have roundup running under zope at > http://fenestro.dyndns.org:8080/Goober%20Booties/ > > (Sorry for the stupid URLs. I tend to let my brain run freely when > there's a text box to type into.) > > I plan to install zwiki next, to see if our conceptual WG tools > environment could be mostly/all done in zope. > > Unfortunately, fenestro is behind a cable modem, so has nearly > no uplink rate. > > Bill > > _______________________________________________ > Tools-team mailing list > Tools-team@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 13 11:02:49 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA21207; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:02:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BvdfA-0008KE-U7; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:08:14 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BvdJl-0004s9-WC; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:46:06 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BvdCc-0003iV-F0 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:38:42 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA19692 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:38:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av9-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net ([81.228.11.116]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BvdHm-0007mJ-Si for tools-team@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:44:04 -0400 Received: by av9-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 7D60137EF0; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:38:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.164]) by av9-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E20437E46 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:38:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 627FD37E51 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:38:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BvdC4-0001m2-8R for tools-team@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:38:08 +0200 Message-ID: <411CD24C.9060608@levkowetz.com> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:38:04 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Poor zope/plone/roundup integration References: <200408131236.i7DCaFc12118@windsor.research.att.com> In-Reply-To: <200408131236.i7DCaFc12118@windsor.research.att.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill Fenner wrote: > Looks like Roundup under zope looks just like Roundup not under zope - > it's basically using zope to do web serving and that's it, not for > providing a common look & feel or a common user database. I was hoping > for tighter integration so that you could log into plone, look at some > articles/downloads/whatever, then move over to Roundup seamlessly. > As the tools are right now, they'd have to log in twice for that. Too bad. The roundup maintainer, Richard [1], is fairly active and responsive; we could ask him if that is on the horizon (or if he would consider adding something like that). Henrik [1] http://www.mechanicalcat.net/richard/log _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 13 12:26:16 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA26764; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:26:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bvexy-0001al-3g; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:31:42 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BverW-0008Av-8v; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:25:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bveax-0003GQ-Kn for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:07:56 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25501 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:07:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-red.research.att.com ([192.20.225.110] helo=mail-white.research.att.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bveg9-0001EB-5r for tools-team@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:13:18 -0400 Received: from windsor.research.att.com (windsor.research.att.com [135.207.26.46]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45A051974B8; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:04:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.8.5) id i7DG7MU14634; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:07:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200408131607.i7DG7MU14634@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: LMM@acm.org Subject: RE: [Tools-team] Playing with zope/plone and friends Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:07:22 -0700 From: Bill Fenner Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.6d/makemail 2.10 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 1ac7cc0a4cd376402b85bc1961a86ac2 I had to restart zope to get it to notice the changes I had made to the configuration file - roundup should let you register now (although I haven't had much luck with staying logged in; it just goes back to asking for a login after going to another page - I haven't had a chance to see if this is a common problem or if I can figure out what's going on...) Bill _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 13 14:35:56 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA03929; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:35:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BvgzR-0003kD-7J; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:41:22 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BvgoV-0005bz-3k; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:30:03 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BvghC-00045M-1M for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:22:30 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA03255 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:22:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av9-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net ([81.228.11.116]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BvgmN-0003Wd-Ky for tools-team@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:27:54 -0400 Received: by av9-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id A28D737F0B; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:21:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.164]) by av9-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 955FF37E7B; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:21:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 875A437E47; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:21:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bvgga-0004bx-0S; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:21:52 +0200 Message-ID: <411D06BE.5010604@levkowetz.com> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:21:50 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Fenner Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Playing with zope/plone and friends References: <200408131607.i7DG7MU14634@windsor.research.att.com> In-Reply-To: <200408131607.i7DG7MU14634@windsor.research.att.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill Fenner wrote: > I had to restart zope to get it to notice the changes I had made > to the configuration file - roundup should let you register now > (although I haven't had much luck with staying logged in; it > just goes back to asking for a login after going to another page - > I haven't had a chance to see if this is a common problem or if > I can figure out what's going on...) I had no trouble registering with roundup... The staying logged in problem is not something I recognize from the roundup trackers I'm running here, but I'm running a 0.6.x version, while you're probably running 0.7.0? Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 16 18:22:23 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA17175; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:22:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bwpxt-0005g9-Tb; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:28:31 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bwpha-0006Au-4Z; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:11:38 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BwpZ6-0008TZ-Q3 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:02:52 -0400 Received: from psmtp.com (exprod6ob3.obsmtp.com [12.158.35.213]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id SAA14079 for ; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:02:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from source ([192.150.22.7]) by exprod6ob3.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:02:50 PDT Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-1 [153.32.1.51]) by smtp-relay-7.sea.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7GM2nag012901 for ; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:02:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7GM2nTk029181 for ; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:02:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 (c-131-136.corp.adobe.com [153.32.131.136]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I2K009IJ7WPCS@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> for tools-team@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:02:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:02:49 -0700 From: Larry Masinter In-reply-to: To: tools-team@ietf.org Message-id: <0I2K009IK7WPCS@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcR//8h5tX+siOLCQ9m2KuPZSiK8cgD3NfJA Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Tools-team] no mail archive for tools-team@lists.ietf.org? X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT None of the email to this list seems to be in the archives at https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 16 18:43:33 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA18723; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:43:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BwqIO-00069e-NY; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:49:41 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bwq8P-0000KI-QH; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:39:21 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bwq3l-0007GZ-Qr for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:34:34 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA18233 for ; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:34:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av3-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.114]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bwq9d-00060f-Nq for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:40:39 -0400 Received: by av3-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id E98D037E80; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:33:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.183]) by av3-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4FC237E42; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:33:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C427837E43; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:33:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bwq35-0007Cg-Ei; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:33:51 +0200 Message-ID: <4121364E.7010605@levkowetz.com> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:33:50 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Larry Masinter Subject: Re: [Tools-team] no mail archive for tools-team@lists.ietf.org? References: <0I2K009IK7WPCS@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> In-Reply-To: <0I2K009IK7WPCS@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 68c8cc8a64a9d0402e43b8eee9fc4199 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Larry Masinter wrote: > None of the email to this list seems to be in the archives at > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team Hmm. The archived seemed to be working right after the list was set up. I'll investigate Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 17 15:10:41 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08838; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:10:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bx9S6-0002LT-I6; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:16:59 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bx9Hs-00027z-HN; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:06:24 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bx9E8-0007Lq-TS for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:02:32 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA07721 for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:02:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av5-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net ([81.228.9.114]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bx9KB-0002AS-Dd for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:08:48 -0400 Received: by av5-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 94E2D37E56; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:01:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.178]) by av5-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8573637E4E for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:01:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7223338010 for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:01:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bx9DX-0004zk-6L for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:01:55 +0200 Message-ID: <4122561D.9050204@levkowetz.com> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:01:49 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-team@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] Accounts on shiraz.levkowetz.com X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 1ac7cc0a4cd376402b85bc1961a86ac2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alex, Bill, Larry, Stas; I've added accounts on shiraz.levkowetz.com for you, but the box is set up to require an ssh key to permit login, so if you'll each send me your public ssh key I'll put it in your .ssh dir so you can get access. Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 18 10:37:30 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA10075; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:37:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxRfS-0006J0-Es; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:43:59 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxRRQ-0003p3-NY; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:29:28 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxRJo-0002xg-9v for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:21:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA08897 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:21:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-red.research.att.com ([192.20.225.110] helo=mail-white.research.att.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxRQ1-00060L-Ef for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:28:02 -0400 Received: from windsor.research.att.com (windsor.research.att.com [135.207.26.46]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9854B1974CC for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:17:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.8.5) id i7IEL2R29014; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 07:21:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200408181421.i7IEL2R29014@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: tools-team@ietf.org Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 07:21:01 -0700 From: Bill Fenner Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.6d/makemail 2.10 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8ac499381112328dd60aea5b1ff596ea Subject: [Tools-team] Regrets for today's call X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d17f825e43c9aed4fd65b7edddddec89 I'm afraid I probably won't make today's call; my dog has an interview for day care (yes, that sounds really California). I'll be online again shortly after the call time. Bill _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 18 11:17:23 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA12636; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:17:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxSI3-00079Y-IC; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:23:52 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxRxZ-0000TW-JC; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:02:41 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxRwm-0000Ht-Qa for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:01:52 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA11540 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:01:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av9-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.107]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxS2x-0006o3-Ga for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:08:19 -0400 Received: by av9-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 7031737EE5; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:01:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.182]) by av9-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FDE737E55 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:01:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4769137E51 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:01:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BxRwB-0002Gs-F5 for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:01:16 +0200 Message-ID: <41236F38.30908@levkowetz.com> Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:01:12 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-team@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 3e15cc4fdc61d7bce84032741d11c8e5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] Teleconference 18 Aug 2004 X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f607d15ccc2bc4eaf3ade8ffa8af02a0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I'm still not sure if I'll be able to join the teleconference today - my regular ip phone didn't work out (I'm lacking some setup instructions) but I'm going to try using a different one. Proposed agenda: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. Agenda bashing 2. Comments on minutes from last teleconference. 3. Action item review. Alex will start the ID-submission tool draft. ??? A volunteer is needed for the Tools inventory, common components and prioritisation draft. Henrik will mail secretariat re. subdomain delegation Henrik will set up shell accounts and web area on his server Henrik will request creation of "tools-discuss@ietf.org" list Henrik will solicit requirements from the secretariat for the ID-submission tool ??? will start to put together a summary of existing tools, so we have it in hand when we announce the discuss list and solicit input on new and current tools. Alex will re-initialise the discussion on the tools-team@ietf.org list, as a continuation of the discussion about needed tools, components, requirements etc which was started before IETF-60, but temporarily put on hold. ??? As soon as we get the tools-discuss list up, draft an announcement to be sent on (my proposal here, should there be more/others?) these lists: ietf-announce wg-chairs (I'm not sure if this will happen before next meeting.) 4. Next steps 5. Any other business. 6. Next meeting: Teleconference Wednesday 25 Aug, same time as today, same codes. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 18 11:40:31 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA14774; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:40:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxSeT-0007n6-64; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:47:01 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxSDH-0002gs-RO; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:18:55 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxS9J-00026g-RU for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:14:49 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA12485 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:14:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exprod6ob4.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.214] helo=psmtp.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxSFS-00076N-Ji for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:21:17 -0400 Received: from source ([192.150.22.7]) by exprod6ob4.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:14:41 PDT Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-1 [153.32.1.51]) by smtp-relay-7.sea.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7IFEfag016910 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:14:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7IFEeTk010821 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:14:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 ([130.248.179.9]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I2N00LCUEC67Z@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:14:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:14:28 -0700 From: Larry Masinter In-reply-to: <411ABA6E.9010008@levkowetz.com> To: tools-team@ietf.org Message-id: <0I2N00LDGEC97Z@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcSABIfQrMGS/S2DQFKZ/QPUEMqgOAFMWecg X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Tools-team] dial-in instructions for conference call? X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT I've misplaced the instructions for calling in. Could someone send them to me? Larry _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 18 12:38:11 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA19967; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:38:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxTYG-0000yQ-Qd; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:44:42 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxTGW-0001Bp-Nj; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:26:20 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxT9z-00088i-Q0 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:19:35 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA18763 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:19:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-dark.research.att.com ([192.20.225.112] helo=mail-yellow.research.att.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxTGC-0000YJ-Ce for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:26:03 -0400 Received: from windsor.research.att.com (windsor.research.att.com [135.207.26.46]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11C3D1974CC; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:15:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.8.5) id i7IGIq400620; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:18:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200408181618.i7IGIq400620@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: henrik@levkowetz.com Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Teleconference 18 Aug 2004 Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:18:51 -0700 From: Bill Fenner Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.6d/makemail 2.10 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 I'm back home now, but edial doesn't recognize PIN 0151989 for me. Bill _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 18 13:08:26 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA22509; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:08:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxU1Z-0001hE-DW; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:14:57 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxToL-0007rX-SW; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:01:17 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxTdn-0005F9-K9 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:50:23 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA20867 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:50:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from basie.internet2.edu ([207.75.164.22]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxTk2-0001F8-Ev for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:56:51 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4014A1CD565 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:50:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from basie.internet2.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (basie.internet2.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 20492-02 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:50:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E4A81CD5C7 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:50:21 -0400 (EDT) To: IETF TOOLS team From: stanislav shalunov Date: 18 Aug 2004 12:50:27 -0400 Message-ID: <86oel8gzl8.fsf@abel.internet2.edu> Lines: 13 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: by mail.internet2.edu virus scanner X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad Subject: [Tools-team] eDial not accepting valid PINs X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f I was told by our IT folks that the problem was solved, but apparently it still bit Bill. If eDial refuses to recognize a valid PIN for you, an alternative way to join the conference is to go to https://edial.internet2.edu/call/0151989 (ignore the bad certificate) and enter your phone number in the telephone field. The system will call out to you. Please only use this method of joining if the normal method fails. -- Stanislav Shalunov http://www.internet2.edu/~shalunov/ This message is designed to be viewed upside down. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 18 13:25:37 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA23549; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:25:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxUI7-00023D-8W; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:32:06 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxU23-0001uz-MB; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:15:27 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxTrQ-0008Jg-KN for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:04:28 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA22113 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:04:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from basie.internet2.edu ([207.75.164.22]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxTxf-0001at-Hg for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:10:56 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEC111CD567; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:04:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from basie.internet2.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (basie.internet2.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 22641-02; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:04:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 853471CD565; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:04:26 -0400 (EDT) To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Teleconference 18 Aug 2004 References: <41236F38.30908@levkowetz.com> From: stanislav shalunov Date: 18 Aug 2004 13:04:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: <41236F38.30908@levkowetz.com> Message-ID: <86ekm4gyxq.fsf@abel.internet2.edu> Lines: 11 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: by mail.internet2.edu virus scanner X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d17f825e43c9aed4fd65b7edddddec89 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25 The conference was recorded. One can use PIN 0169505 to listen. I'll also upload the WAV file somewhere once it's downloaded. (The WAV file might let you fast forward and go back, depending on the software you use to play it; otherwise, it will contain exactly the same information.) -- Stanislav Shalunov http://www.internet2.edu/~shalunov/ .signature: I/O Error _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 18 13:36:49 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA24277; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:36:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxUT0-0002HL-26; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:43:19 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxUCj-0003ak-GQ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:26:29 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxU72-0002w4-Ia for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:20:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA23269 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:20:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from basie.internet2.edu ([207.75.164.22]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxUDH-0001wx-N9 for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:27:04 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AF731CD5D6 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:20:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from basie.internet2.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (basie.internet2.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 25213-06 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:20:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EDCC1CD5B0 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:20:34 -0400 (EDT) To: tools-team@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Teleconference 18 Aug 2004 References: <41236F38.30908@levkowetz.com> <86ekm4gyxq.fsf@abel.internet2.edu> From: stanislav shalunov Date: 18 Aug 2004 13:20:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: <86ekm4gyxq.fsf@abel.internet2.edu> Message-ID: <86acwsgy6v.fsf@abel.internet2.edu> Lines: 8 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: by mail.internet2.edu virus scanner X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad The recording can be found at http://netflow.internet2.edu/tools/20040818-tools.wav (it's a 23-MB file). -- Stanislav Shalunov http://www.internet2.edu/~shalunov/ This message is designed to be viewed at room temperature. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 18 14:12:13 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA26653; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:12:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxV1G-0002zp-Om; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:18:43 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxUln-00010W-7E; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:02:43 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxUj6-0000Z4-6W for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:59:56 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA25834 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:59:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-dark.research.att.com ([192.20.225.112] helo=mail-yellow.research.att.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxUow-0002l2-Ku for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:05:59 -0400 Received: from windsor.research.att.com (windsor.research.att.com [135.207.26.46]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B4FF1974CC for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:55:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.8.5) id i7IHwwp02077; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:58:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200408181758.i7IHwwp02077@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: tools-team@ietf.org Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:58:56 -0700 From: Bill Fenner Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.6d/makemail 2.10 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126 Subject: [Tools-team] More on zope/plone/etc X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 I've added zwiki both standalone: http://fenestro.dyndns.org:8080/Wiki/ and within plone: http://fenestro.dyndns.org:8080/Test%20Plone%20Site/WikiTest/ Oddly enough, zwiki has an issue tracker built in. You can see it in action on the plone installation; see the "issue tracker" link in the green bar. As with the rest of the stuff on this site, I haven't configured it, so things like the mail interface are still missing. I tried installing the commonly-recommended Plone Collector issue tracker, and zope wouldn't start and didn't log anything about why anywhere I could find. That makes me a little wary of zope. Bill _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 19 14:11:12 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20814; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:11:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxrU2-0001Wh-Co; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:17:54 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxrN7-0000dU-1W; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:10:45 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxrKN-0000Im-6D for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:07:55 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20682 for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:07:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exprod6ob4.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.214] helo=psmtp.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxrQl-0001T6-Ds for tools-team@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:14:35 -0400 Received: from source ([192.150.22.8]) by exprod6ob4.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:07:41 PDT Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-1 [153.32.1.51]) by smtp-relay-8.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7JI7LJI013148; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:07:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7JI7KTk006961; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:07:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 ([130.248.178.210]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I2P004RCGZYBX@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:07:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:07:11 -0700 From: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] More on zope/plone/etc In-reply-to: <200408181758.i7IHwwp02077@windsor.research.att.com> To: "'Bill Fenner'" , tools-team@ietf.org Message-id: <0I2P004REH00BX@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcSFTuR0uJmDBh23T32qjWLsIxKwsQAyGgog X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT how do we get accounts? > > I've added zwiki both standalone: > > http://fenestro.dyndns.org:8080/Wiki/ > > and within plone: > > http://fenestro.dyndns.org:8080/Test%20Plone%20Site/WikiTest/ > _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 19 14:26:46 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22133; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:26:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bxrj5-0001q9-Ml; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:33:28 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxrZy-0002RX-Jw; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:24:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxrUG-0001Zn-Qy for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:18:08 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA21461 for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:18:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-dark.research.att.com ([192.20.225.112] helo=mail-yellow.research.att.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bxraj-0001fX-DM for tools-team@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:24:50 -0400 Received: from windsor.research.att.com (windsor.research.att.com [135.207.26.46]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C23A3A7BBE; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:17:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.8.5) id i7JIHZW17648; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:17:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200408191817.i7JIHZW17648@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: LMM@acm.org Subject: RE: [Tools-team] More on zope/plone/etc Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:17:32 -0700 From: Bill Fenner Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.6d/makemail 2.10 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de I haven't completely figured out zope yet. plone lets you add your own accounts, but I guess those accounts don't work on the raw wiki. Bill _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 23 14:40:09 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA29917; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:40:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BzJk8-0002mW-GF; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:40:33 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BzJS7-0004qS-Ab; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:21:55 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BzJCw-0002Ti-5A for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:06:14 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA27145 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:06:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av1-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net ([81.228.9.105]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BzJDC-000215-3I for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:06:31 -0400 Received: by av1-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 8D34837ED6; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:05:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.178]) by av1-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CDC437E49 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:05:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 615F93800E for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:05:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BzJCJ-0004p0-21 for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:05:35 +0200 Message-ID: <412A31ED.8080505@levkowetz.com> Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:05:33 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-team@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ee80a2074afbfe28d15369f4e74e579d Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] Minutes from teleconference 18 Aug 2004 X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2a76bcd37b1c8a21336eb0a1ea6bbf48 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Back home again :-) Vacation is nice, but so is being home. Below are my notes from the teleconference last Wednesday. Sorry about the delay, my batteries ran out before I got it sent Wednesday, and I had connectivity problems later. If I've missed something, please comment to the list. Henrik --------------------------------------------------------- 1. Agenda bashing Nothing added 2. Comments on minutes from last teleconference. No comments 3. Action item review. Alex will start the ID-submission tool draft. Nothing from Alex so far. Henrik will take contact. ??? A volunteer is needed for the Tools inventory, common components and prioritisation draft. No volunteer. Henrik will take this (I'll check with Alex first though) Henrik will mail secretariat re. subdomain delegation Done. The feedback indicates this should go through, to be up this week. Henrik will set up shell accounts and web area on his server Done. Have public ssh key for Bill, Larry, Stas, accounts enabled. Missing pub. ssh key for Alex. Henrik will request creation of "tools-discuss@ietf.org" list Done, and approved by Harald. Should be up this week Henrik will solicit requirements from the secretariat for the ID-submission tool Not done, To do this week ??? will start to put together a summary of existing tools, so we have it in hand when we announce the discuss list and solicit input on new and current tools. Henrik/Alex Alex will re-initialise the discussion on the tools-team@ietf.org list, as a continuation of the discussion about needed tools, components, requirements etc which was started before IETF-60, but temporarily put on hold. Not done yet ??? As soon as we get the tools-discuss list up, draft an announcement to be sent on (my proposal here, should there be more/others?) these lists: ietf-announce wg-chairs Larry will take this on. 4. Next steps Discussion: - Inventory of possible tools and platforms that could be used. Will do this on a Wiki on the website. Mail archives - are the IETF mail archives in the state they should be... Harald: Current mail archive problems seems to have to do with inability to set up file permissions OK Larry : IMC archives nice. Larry: We should be clear about who are the users, and how should we evaluate Ideal would be to set up some kind of survey, (not poll) to ask people for input on "what do you think of tools" Harald: "What do you use the archive for", "What would you like to use the archive for" Larry: Identify who needs what tools for what. Easy to over-spec "nice-to-have" as absolute requirements. Need to separate necessities from "nice to have" Harald: Rule "Don't announce draft during IETF week" resulted in someone refusing to submit draft - loosing track of why the rule is there. What process is the tool supporting Harald: Larry could you write something about how to evaluate what people need and how to find out what they want? ---- Expect lots of feedback on the discuss list. Larry: What about tools for activities are more or less outside of the process? Harald: * Collection (Inventory) phase * Prioritation phase * Execution phase Harald: If we discover that some things would be easier to handle if we change the process a little bit, we shouldn't be afraid of saying so. Larry: Sending out the announcement we should indicate our work schedule. Henrik: Needs to have overlap of the phases Harald: Agree Larry: Contact Malamud? Harald: Very busy at the moment. This week and next week you may be very busy. Let him review our documents, and then go from there. Focus on getting the drafts out. Ask Carl for review specifically. 5. Any other business. Nothing. 6. Action item summary: * Larry will write a first draft of a note to send out to the ietf and wgchairs lists about the tools-discuss list. To be refined on the tools-team list. * Larry will write a summary on how to find out what people want and how to evaluate what is actually needed * Henrik will contact Alex * Henrik or Alex will start the Tools inventory/prio draft * Henrik will add tools.ietf.org to his DNS, Stano and Harald will run secondaries, so this is ready for when delegation is made from ietf.org * Henrik will solicit ID-submission requirements from Secretariat 7. Next meeting: Teleconference Wednesday 25 Aug, same time as today, same codes. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 23 18:39:24 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA23700; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:39:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BzNTk-00018F-7y; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:39:52 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BzMww-0006Vv-QP; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:05:58 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BzLXb-00083P-77 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:35:43 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA10161 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:35:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BzLXs-0005kg-Ny for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:36:02 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7NKZZ9d038854; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:35:35 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7NKZZqe038853; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:35:35 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:35:35 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Henrik Levkowetz In-Reply-To: <412A31ED.8080505@levkowetz.com> Message-ID: <20040823134337.S5017@measurement-factory.com> References: <412A31ED.8080505@levkowetz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org Subject: [Tools-team] ID submission requirements X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0ddefe323dd869ab027dbfff7eff0465 On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > 3. Action item review. > > Alex will start the ID-submission tool draft. > Nothing from Alex so far. Henrik will take contact. I have started last week and should be able to release the first version this week. I do have a few related questions. Should I just post the draft to the list first? I can submit the draft for publication instead, but since we (as a team) have not reviewed the first version, it may be better to gauge initial "direction consensus" first. > ??? A volunteer is needed for the Tools inventory, > common components and prioritisation draft. > > No volunteer. Henrik will take this (I'll check with > Alex first though) Thank you, I have no objections and will try to contribute. > Henrik will solicit requirements from the secretariat > for the ID-submission tool > > Not done, To do this week Should we discuss and forward the first version of the ID submission requirements draft to the secretariat before we solicit comments? Do we want their comments to be affected by our initial thoughts on the scope and functionality of the tool? On one hand, we do not want to influence their comments. On the other, the draft may help them to express their requirements and/or objections better. N.B. I am back from vacation and should be able to join the next conference call. I accidently found a Cisco IP phone and will try to figure that out. Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 23 18:40:54 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA23826; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:40:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BzNVC-0001Am-89; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:41:22 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BzMxM-0007G5-BQ; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:06:24 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BzLll-0003W9-6b for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:50:21 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA11818 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:50:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av9-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net ([81.228.11.115]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BzLm2-0006Ey-QP for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:50:40 -0400 Received: by av9-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 1057F37E79; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:49:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.163]) by av9-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0E2237E43; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:49:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp3-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D610C37E57; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:49:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BzLl8-0005j5-ND; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:49:42 +0200 Message-ID: <412A5865.4000604@levkowetz.com> Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:49:41 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Rousskov References: <412A31ED.8080505@levkowetz.com> <20040823134337.S5017@measurement-factory.com> In-Reply-To: <20040823134337.S5017@measurement-factory.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: fb6060cb60c0cea16e3f7219e40a0a81 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org Subject: [Tools-team] Re: ID submission requirements X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 6cca30437e2d04f45110f2ff8dc1b1d5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alex Rousskov wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > >> 3. Action item review. >> >> Alex will start the ID-submission tool draft. >> Nothing from Alex so far. Henrik will take contact. > > > I have started last week and should be able to release the first version > this week. I do have a few related questions. > > Should I just post the draft to the list first? I can submit the draft > for publication instead, but since we (as a team) have not reviewed the > first version, it may be better to gauge initial "direction consensus" > first. Yes, I think posting to the list first would be good. > >> ??? A volunteer is needed for the Tools inventory, >> common components and prioritisation draft. >> >> No volunteer. Henrik will take this (I'll check with >> Alex first though) > > > Thank you, I have no objections and will try to contribute. Great, thanks. >> Henrik will solicit requirements from the secretariat >> for the ID-submission tool >> >> Not done, To do this week > > Should we discuss and forward the first version of the ID submission > requirements draft to the secretariat before we solicit comments? Do we > want their comments to be affected by our initial thoughts on the scope > and functionality of the tool? > > On one hand, we do not want to influence their comments. On the other, > the draft may help them to express their requirements and/or objections > better. I believe it's good if the secretariat generates their requirements independently from us, while the first revision of the draft would reflect the requirements that we see. If the secretariat then uses the draft as input to a second revision of their requirements, that's just fine, I think. Barbara is subscribed to the list, and we said that the secretariat developers would be welcome to subscribe, so they'll see the first drafts anyhow :-) > > N.B. I am back from vacation and should be able to join the next > conference call. I accidently found a Cisco IP phone and will try to > figure that out. Oh, cool. Last week's call I made from my SIP phone from the Netherlands, while on vacation. Fun! In general the sound was good, but I think that the volume adjustments for the different participants maybe worked better when joining over POTS than when I now went directly into the conferencing system over IP. Can't really see why this should be so, but I had a hard time hearing Bill, who mostly was just a whisper... Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 24 05:09:51 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA16870; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 05:09:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BzXJv-0003vd-Hm; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 05:10:24 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BzWyU-00040b-LC; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 04:48:14 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BzWfA-0000uk-Ox for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 04:28:18 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA14225 for ; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 04:28:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BzWfW-00039R-LJ for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 04:28:41 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59C1D61C0C; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:25:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 11148-03; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:25:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from halvestr-w2k02.emea.cisco.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC3DF61B98; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:25:54 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:25:53 +0200 From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand To: Alex Rousskov , Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] ID submission requirements Message-ID: <0A4717ACAEA9D6E4B92656AA@[192.168.1.225]> In-Reply-To: <20040823134337.S5017@measurement-factory.com> References: <412A31ED.8080505@levkowetz.com> <20040823134337.S5017@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.5 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My opinions.... --On 23. august 2004 14:35 -0600 Alex Rousskov wrote: > Should I just post the draft to the list first? I can submit the draft > for publication instead, but since we (as a team) have not reviewed the > first version, it may be better to gauge initial "direction consensus" > first. Yes. > Should we discuss and forward the first version of the ID submission > requirements draft to the secretariat before we solicit comments? Do we > want their comments to be affected by our initial thoughts on the scope > and functionality of the tool? Yes. Open communication lines with the secretariat is very important - and if we have totally different pictures in our minds when we say "ID submission tool", this needs to be surfaced as early as possible. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 25 10:27:36 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA19114; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:27:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BzylE-0002yd-P6; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:28:25 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BzyeV-0002Mc-Vz; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:21:27 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BzyRf-00060F-Gg for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:08:11 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA16925 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:08:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av1-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net ([81.228.11.107]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BzySJ-0002dv-8x for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:08:52 -0400 Received: by av1-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 62E9C37E53; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:07:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.164]) by av1-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F2A837E4E for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:07:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 369AF37E5B for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:07:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BzyR0-000134-Cq for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:07:30 +0200 Message-ID: <412C9D21.5030200@levkowetz.com> Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:07:29 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-team@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 082a9cbf4d599f360ac7f815372a6a15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] Agenda for 25 Aug 2004 Telechat X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: c0bedb65cce30976f0bf60a0a39edea4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Here is the proposed agenda for today. --------------------------------------------------------- 1. Agenda bashing 2. Comments on minutes from last teleconference. 3. Action item review. * Larry will write a first draft of a note to send out to the ietf and wgchairs lists about the tools-discuss list. To be refined on the tools-team list. * Larry will write a summary on how to find out what people want and how to evaluate what is actually needed * Henrik will contact Alex * Henrik or Alex will start the Tools inventory/prio draft * Henrik will add tools.ietf.org to his DNS, Stano and Harald will run secondaries, so this is ready for when delegation is made from ietf.org * Henrik will solicit ID-submission requirements from Secretariat -- The following items were outstanding from the meeting 2 weeks ago, but not included in last weeks action items, (although they should have been.) * Alex will start the ID-submission tool draft. * Henrik will mail secretariat re. subdomain delegation (done, but not completed by the secretariat yet) * Henrik will request creation of "tools-discuss@ietf.org" list (done, but not completed by secretariat yet) * Henrik will solicit requirements from the secretariat for the ID-submission tool (done, but not completed by secretariat yet) * Alex will re-initiate the discussion on the tools-team@ietf.org list, as a continuation of the discussion about needed tools, components, requirements etc which was started before IETF-60, but temporarily put on hold. 4. Status of drafts 5. Next steps 6. Any other business. 7. New action items, summary 8. Next meeting: Teleconference Wednesday 1 Sep, same time as today, same codes. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 25 12:39:52 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29458; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:39:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C00pD-0005RP-9x; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:40:42 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C00jS-0004UQ-AH; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:34:42 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C00DO-0007H4-0n for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:01:34 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA26503 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:01:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net ([81.228.9.112]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C00E3-0004kn-1j for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:02:16 -0400 Received: by av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 3B1C537EAD; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:00:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.178]) by av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C12F37E47 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:00:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D19E38017 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:00:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C00Cl-0001fT-Vj for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:00:56 +0200 Message-ID: <412CB7B7.6040705@levkowetz.com> Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:00:55 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-team@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] ID-submission tool, secretariat input X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I just received the following from Barbara: Barbara B. Fuller wrote: > Hi Henrik: > > At 10:23 AM 8/24/2004 +0200, you wrote: [Snip personal stuff] >> As you may have seen on the tools-team mailing list, we've >> started work on the documents containing ID-submission tools >> requirements, from the IETF community perspective, but need >> the secretariat's input on requirements from your side. >> >> Do you have any indication on when you would have a first >> draft of these available (I don't mean in ietf draft format, >> just to be clear - I expect us to put the merged requirements >> in that format, but don't see any benefit of doing that for >> the individual lists of requirements :) > > > Mike Lee, Dinara Suleymanova, Rebecca Bunch, and I will meet tomorrow to > discuss the requirements for an I-D submission tool from the > Secretariat's perspective. Mike is the Secretariat developer whom you > met in San Diego, and Dinara and Rebecca are the members of the > Secretariat team who process Internet-Drafts. We will do our best to > send you our "high-level" requirements sometime next week. > _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 25 13:40:14 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA03969; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:40:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C01ld-0006aj-Bc; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:41:03 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C01KL-0002nx-Ao; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:12:49 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C012y-0007vG-Af for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:54:52 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA00420 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:54:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av5-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.111]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C013e-0005ey-Lj for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:55:35 -0400 Received: by av5-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 5685537E68; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:54:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.182]) by av5-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46D7337E4E for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:54:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FAD837E4A for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:54:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C012N-0003dn-1T for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:54:15 +0200 Message-ID: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:54:14 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tools-team@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 6ffdee8af20de249c24731d8414917d3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] Minutes from 25 Aug 2004 Telechat X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8fbbaa16f9fd29df280814cb95ae2290 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Here is the proposed agenda for today. --------------------------------------------------------- 1. Agenda bashing Agenda Ok 2. Comments on minutes from last teleconference. No comments 3. Action item review. * Larry will write a first draft of a note to send out to the ietf and wgchairs lists about the tools-discuss list. To be refined on the tools-team list. Not done yet, will be done not later than this weekend. Need some input on the schedule - short discussion was held: Focus on secretariat tools for the first 6 months, but take input on other tools; put toghether schedule for individual tools based on input from list and secretariat. * Larry will write a summary on how to find out what people want and how to evaluate what is actually needed Not done yet, will be done not later than this weekend. * Henrik will contact Alex Done * Henrik or Alex will start the Tools inventory/prio draft Started, first draft to list thu/fri. * Henrik will add tools.ietf.org to his DNS, Stas and Harald will run secondaries, so this is ready for when delegation is made from ietf.org Done * Henrik will solicit ID-submission requirements from Secretariat Response from Barbara received, sent to the list. Expect response next week -- The following items were outstanding from the meeting 2 weeks ago, but not included in last weeks action items, (although they should have been.) * Alex will start the ID-submission tool draft. Started, to be sent to the list today or tomorrow. * Henrik will mail secretariat re. subdomain delegation (done, but not completed by the secretariat yet) * Henrik will request creation of "tools-discuss@ietf.org" list (done, but not completed by secretariat yet) * Henrik will solicit requirements from the secretariat for the ID-submission tool Done * Alex will re-initiate the discussion on the tools-team@ietf.org list, as a continuation of the discussion about needed tools, components, requirements etc which was started before IETF-60, but temporarily put on hold. 4. Status of drafts Reviewed above. 5. Next steps Larry: Summary the packages reviewed. 6. Any other business. None 7. Action items == From earlier weeks: * Larry will write a first draft of a note to send out to the ietf and wgchairs lists about the tools-discuss list. To be refined on the tools-team list. * Larry will write a summary on how to find out what people want and how to evaluate what is actually needed * Henrik will send first copy of Tools inventory/prio draft to the list Thu. or Fri. * Alex will send the first copy of ID-Submission req. draft to the list Wed. or Thu. * Henrik will follow up on creation of "tools-discuss@ietf.org" list, and on the subdomain delegation * Alex will re-initiate the discussion on the tools-team@ietf.org list, as a continuation of the discussion about needed tools, components, requirements etc which was started before IETF-60, but temporarily put on hold. == New: * Henrik fix up web page with link to charter etc, and send msg. * Henrik Get wiki set up * Stas Summary of tools reviewed/mentioned on the mailing list on a wiki page. 8. Next meeting: Teleconference Wednesday 1 Sep, same time as today, same codes. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 25 15:14:46 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA10701; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:14:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C03FA-0008Cq-8M; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:15:36 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C02s6-0008I4-PR; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:51:46 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C01Yl-0004dW-QJ for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:27:43 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA03090 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:27:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C01ZN-0006M7-U5 for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:28:26 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7PHRS9d055766 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:27:28 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7PHRSe4055765; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:27:28 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:27:28 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: tools-team@ietf.org Message-ID: <20040825110109.K49770@measurement-factory.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="0-1716868460-1093454848=:49770" X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cce76727b3e6fc1828f2a1e4df684182 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:51:45 -0400 Subject: [Tools-team] Requirements for IETF Draft Submission Interface, v1.4 X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 800a60a6d139d15fdd4640055f94a486 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --0-1716868460-1093454848=:49770 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Hi, My initial take at the ID submission requirements draft is attached as plain text and HTML files. I do not like the current organization of the draft, but I would like to hear your high-level comments before polishing it. Specifically, - Should we be talking about different modes of draft submission? The draft itentifies 3.5 modes (see Section 5). We can simplify a lot if we focus on one mode only, but I think that all currently documented modes except for "Full Automation" are essential for a good draft submission environment. And "Full Automation" is the direction we should be moving in long-term. - I am having trouble coming up with good terminology to name the subject of our requirements. Especially with multiple modes, we are not talking aboutra single ID submission tool or interface. We are talking about several tools, and each tool has at least two sides/interfaces: submitter and publisher. Is there a better terminology than "ID submission tool"? - What do we do if ideal draft submission environment conflicts with current IETF rules. For example, if the tool allows for instant publication, some drafts may have more than 99 published versions and refering to a draft by its name and version should be exception rather than the rule (just the name should be used in most cases). Can we suggest such changes to the IETF? - Should I delete the "Status Quo" section? (Section 2) Thanks, Alex. --0-1716868460-1093454848=:49770 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; name="id.txt" Content-ID: <20040825112728.T49770@measurement-factory.com> Content-Description: draft-submission.txt Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="id.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: BASE64 DQoNClRPT0xTIHRlYW0gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBBLiBSb3Vzc2tvdg0KSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJh ZnQgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFRoZSBNZWFz dXJlbWVudCBGYWN0b3J5DQpFeHBpcmVzOiBGZWJydWFyeSAyMywgMjAwNSAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBBdWd1c3QgMjUsIDIwMDQN Cg0KDQogICAgICAgICAgICBSZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgZm9yIElFVEYgRHJhZnQg U3VibWlzc2lvbiBJbnRlcmZhY2UNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBkcmFm dC1pZXRmLXRvb2xzLWRyYWZ0LXN1Ym1pc3Npb24NCg0KU3RhdHVzIG9mIHRo aXMgTWVtbw0KDQogICBUaGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGlzIGFuIEludGVybmV0LURy YWZ0IGFuZCBpcyBzdWJqZWN0IHRvIGFsbCBwcm92aXNpb25zDQogICBvZiBz ZWN0aW9uIDMgb2YgUkZDIDM2NjcuICBCeSBzdWJtaXR0aW5nIHRoaXMgSW50 ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnQsIGVhY2gNCiAgIGF1dGhvciByZXByZXNlbnRzIHRoYXQg YW55IGFwcGxpY2FibGUgcGF0ZW50IG9yIG90aGVyIElQUiBjbGFpbXMgb2YN CiAgIHdoaWNoIGhlIG9yIHNoZSBpcyBhd2FyZSBoYXZlIGJlZW4gb3Igd2ls bCBiZSBkaXNjbG9zZWQsIGFuZCBhbnkgb2YNCiAgIHdoaWNoIGhlIG9yIHNo ZSBiZWNvbWUgYXdhcmUgd2lsbCBiZSBkaXNjbG9zZWQsIGluIGFjY29yZGFu Y2Ugd2l0aA0KICAgUkZDIDM2NjguDQoNCiAgIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBh cmUgd29ya2luZyBkb2N1bWVudHMgb2YgdGhlIEludGVybmV0IEVuZ2luZWVy aW5nDQogICBUYXNrIEZvcmNlIChJRVRGKSwgaXRzIGFyZWFzLCBhbmQgaXRz IHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXBzLiAgTm90ZSB0aGF0DQogICBvdGhlciBncm91cHMg bWF5IGFsc28gZGlzdHJpYnV0ZSB3b3JraW5nIGRvY3VtZW50cyBhcw0KICAg SW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnRzLg0KDQogICBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdHMgYXJlIGRy YWZ0IGRvY3VtZW50cyB2YWxpZCBmb3IgYSBtYXhpbXVtIG9mIHNpeCBtb250 aHMNCiAgIGFuZCBtYXkgYmUgdXBkYXRlZCwgcmVwbGFjZWQsIG9yIG9ic29s ZXRlZCBieSBvdGhlciBkb2N1bWVudHMgYXQgYW55DQogICB0aW1lLiAgSXQg aXMgaW5hcHByb3ByaWF0ZSB0byB1c2UgSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnRzIGFzIHJl ZmVyZW5jZQ0KICAgbWF0ZXJpYWwgb3IgdG8gY2l0ZSB0aGVtIG90aGVyIHRo YW4gYXMgIndvcmsgaW4gcHJvZ3Jlc3MuIg0KDQogICBUaGUgbGlzdCBvZiBj dXJyZW50IEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBjYW4gYmUgYWNjZXNzZWQgYXQNCiAg IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaWV0Zi8xaWQtYWJzdHJhY3RzLnR4dC4N Cg0KICAgVGhlIGxpc3Qgb2YgSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnQgU2hhZG93IERpcmVj dG9yaWVzIGNhbiBiZSBhY2Nlc3NlZCBhdA0KICAgaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRm Lm9yZy9zaGFkb3cuaHRtbC4NCg0KICAgVGhpcyBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdCB3 aWxsIGV4cGlyZSBvbiBGZWJydWFyeSAyMywgMjAwNS4NCg0KQ29weXJpZ2h0 IE5vdGljZQ0KDQogICBDb3B5cmlnaHQgKEMpIFRoZSBJbnRlcm5ldCBTb2Np ZXR5ICgyMDA0KS4NCg0KQWJzdHJhY3QNCg0KICAgVGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBz cGVjaWZpZXMgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzIGZvciBhbiBJRVRGIHRvb2wgZmFjaWxp dGF0aW5nDQogICBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdCBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIGFuZCBwdWJs aWNhdGlvbi4NCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNClJvdXNza292ICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgRXhwaXJlcyBGZWJydWFyeSAyMywgMjAwNSAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICBbUGFnZSAxXQ0KDA0KSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnQgICAgRHJhZnQgU3VibWlz c2lvbiBJbnRlcmZhY2UgUmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzICAgIEF1Z3VzdCAyMDA0DQoN Cg0KVGFibGUgb2YgQ29udGVudHMNCg0KICAgMS4gIEludHJvZHVjdGlvbiAu IC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4g LiAuICAzDQogICAyLiAgVG9vbCBTdGF0dXMgUXVvICAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAu IC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gIDMNCiAgIDMuICBT Y29wZSAgLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAu IC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAgNA0KICAgNC4gIFRlcm1pbm9sb2d5ICAuIC4g LiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAu ICA0DQogICA1LiAgTW9kZXMgIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4g LiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gIDQNCiAgICAgNS4xICAg RnVsbCBhdXRvbWF0aW9uIG1vZGUgLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4g LiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAgNQ0KICAgICA1LjIgICBQdWJsaWNhdGlvbiBhdXRv bWF0aW9uIG1vZGUgIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuICA1 DQogICAgIDUuMyAgIEh1bWFuLXRvLWh1bWFuIG1vZGUgIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAu IC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gIDUNCiAgICAgNS40ICAgRHJ5 IFJ1biBtb2RlIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAu IC4gLiAuIC4gLiAgNg0KICAgICA1LjUgICBNb2RlIGF1dG9tYXRpb24gbWF0 cml4IC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuICA2DQog ICA2LiAgRHJhZnQgVmFsaWRhdGlvbiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4g LiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gIDYNCiAgICAgNi4xICAgQWJzb2x1 dGUgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzICAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4g LiAuIC4gLiAgNg0KICAgICA2LjIgICBEZXNpcmVhYmxlIGZlYXR1cmVzICAu IC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuICA3DQogICAg IDYuMyAgIERyYWZ0IHRleHQgaW50ZXJwcmV0YXRpb24gIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAu IC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gIDcNCiAgIDcuICBTdWJtaXNzaW9uIE1l dGFkYXRhICAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAu IC4gLiAgNw0KICAgOC4gIFNlY3VyaXR5IENvbnNpZGVyYXRpb25zICAuIC4g LiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuICA4DQogICA5LiAg SUFOQSBDb25zaWRlcmF0aW9ucyAgLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4g LiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gIDgNCiAgIDEwLiAgIENvbXBsaWFuY2UgLiAu IC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4g LiAgOA0KICAgQS4gIEFja25vd2xlZGdtZW50cyAgLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAu IC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuICA4DQogICBCLiAgQ2hh bmdlIExvZyAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAu IC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gIDgNCiAgIDExLiAgIE5vcm1hdGl2ZSBSZWZlcmVu Y2VzIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAg OA0KICAgICAgIEF1dGhvcidzIEFkZHJlc3MgLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4g LiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gLiAuICA4DQogICAgICAgSW50ZWxs ZWN0dWFsIFByb3BlcnR5IGFuZCBDb3B5cmlnaHQgU3RhdGVtZW50cyAuIC4g LiAuIC4gLiAuIC4gIDkNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoN Cg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQpSb3Vzc2tvdiAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IEV4cGlyZXMgRmVicnVhcnkgMjMsIDIwMDUgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgW1Bh Z2UgMl0NCgwNCkludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0ICAgIERyYWZ0IFN1Ym1pc3Npb24g SW50ZXJmYWNlIFJlcXVpcmVtZW50cyAgICBBdWd1c3QgMjAwNA0KDQoNCjEu ICBJbnRyb2R1Y3Rpb24NCg0KICAgUHVibGlzaGVkIEludGVybmV0IERyYWZ0 cyBhcmUgcHJpbWFyeSBtZWFucyBvZiBzdHJ1Y3R1cmVkDQogICBjb21tdW5p Y2F0aW9uIHdpdGhpbiBJRVRGLiAgQ3VycmVudCBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdCAo SUQpIHN1Ym1pc3Npb24NCiAgIGFuZCBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbiBtZWNoYW5pc21z IGhpbmRlciBlZmZpY2llbnQgYW5kIHRpbWVseSBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9uDQog ICB3aGlsZSBjcmVhdGluZyB1bm5lY2Vzc2FyeSBsb2FkIG9uIHRoZSBJRVRG IFNlY3JldGFyaWF0LiAgSUVURiBUT09Mcw0KICAgdGVhbSByZWNvbW1lbmRz IGZvcm1hbGl6YXRpb24gYW5kIGF1dG9tYXRpb24gb2YgdGhlIGN1cnJlbnQN CiAgIG1lY2hhbmlzbXMuICBUaGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGNvbnRhaW5zIHNwZWNp ZmljIGF1dG9tYXRpb24gcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzLg0KDQoyLiAgVG9vbCBTdGF0 dXMgUXVvDQoNCiAgIFRvIGdldCBhbiBJbnRlcm5ldCBEcmFmdCBwdWJsaXNo ZWQsIGFuIElFVEYgcGFydGljaXBhbnQgZS1tYWlscyBkcmFmdA0KICAgdGV4 dCB0byB0aGUgSUVURiBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCwgYWxvbmcgd2l0aCBhbiBpbmZv cm1hbCBub3RlIGFza2luZyB0bw0KICAgcHVibGlzaCB0aGUgZHJhZnQuICBT ZWNyZXRhcmlhdCBzdGFmZiByZWFkcyB0aGUgbm90ZSwgcmV2aWV3cywgYW5k DQogICB0aGVuIGFwcHJvdmVzIG9yIHJlamVjdHMgdGhlIHN1Ym1pc3Npb24u ICBBbiBhcHByb3ZlZCBkcmFmdCBpcw0KICAgYXV0b21hdGljYWxseSAoWFhY OiBvciBtYW51YWxseT8pICBjb3BpZWQgdG8gSUVURiB3ZWIgc2l0ZSwgd2l0 aCB0aGUNCiAgIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRpbmcgYW5ub3VuY2VtZW50IHNlbnQgdG8g YXBwcm9wcmlhdGUgSUVURiBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QocykuDQoNCiAgIENvbGxl Y3RpdmVseSwgSUVURiBwYXJ0aWNpcGFudHMgc3VibWl0IHRob3VzYW5kcyAo WFhYOiBpcyB0aGVyZSBhDQogICBtb3JlIGFjY3VyYXRlIG51bWJlcj8pIG9m IEludGVybmV0IERyYWZ0cyBwZXIgeWVhciAoWFhYOiBwcm92aWRlDQogICBp bmRpdmlkdWFsIGFuZCBXRyBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIG51bWJlcnMgc2VwYXJhdGVs eSkuICBUaGUgdmFzdCBtYWpvcml0eQ0KICAgb2Ygc3VibWl0dGVkIGRyYWZ0 cyBhcmUgYXBwcm92ZWQgZm9yIHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIChYWFg6IGFyZSBzdGF0 cw0KICAgYXZhaWxhYmxlPykuICBJdCB1c3VhbGx5IHRha2VzIHRoZSBTZWNy ZXRhcmlhdCAxMi0yNCBob3VycyAoWFhYOiBhcmUNCiAgIHN0YXRzIGF2YWls YWJsZT8pICB0byByZXZpZXcgdGhlIGRyYWZ0LiAgRHVlIHRvIG11Y2ggaGln aGVyIGRlbWFuZA0KICAgYW5kIGZpeGVkIHByb2Nlc3NpbmcgY2FwYWNpdHks IHJldmlld3MgYXJvdW5kIElFVEYgZmFjZS10by1mYWNlDQogICBtZWV0aW5n cyB0YWtlIG11Y2ggbG9uZ2VyLCBjcmVhdGluZyBhIGxvbmcgcXVldWUgb2Yg dW5wcm9jZXNzZWQNCiAgIGRyYWZ0cyB0aGF0IGFyZSB0aGVuIGFubm91bmNl ZCBuZWFybHkgc2ltdWx0YW5lb3VzbHkuDQoNCiAgIFRvIHJlZHVjZSBTZWNy ZXRhcmlhdCBsb2FkIChYWFg6IGFyZSB0aGVyZSBvdGhlciByZWFzb25zPyks IGRyYWZ0cw0KICAgc3VibWl0dGVkIGNsb3NlIHRvIElFVEYgbWVldGluZ3Mg YXJlIGlnbm9yZWQuDQoNCiAgIEluZm9ybWFsIGludGVyZmFjZSBmb3Igc3Vi bWl0dGluZyBhbmQgcHVibGlzaGluZyBkcmFmdHMgZGlzY291cmFnZXMNCiAg IGF1dG9tYXRpb24uICBMYWNrIG9mIGF1dG9tYXRpb24gZGlzY291cmFnZXMg ZnJlcXVlbnQgdXBkYXRlcy4NCiAgIEluZnJlcXVlbnQgdXBkYXRlcyBsZWFk IHRvIHN0YWxlIHB1Ymxpc2hlZCBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbi4NCg0KICAgRHVyaW5n IHBlcmlvZHMgb2YgaGlnaCBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwIGFjdGl2aXR5LCB0aGUg ZGVsYXlzIGFzc29jaWF0ZWQNCiAgIHdpdGggZHJhZnQgcHVibGljYXRpb24g dGltZXMgbWFrZSBvZmZpY2lhbCBpbnRlcmZhY2UgZXNwZWNpYWxseQ0KICAg aW5hcHByb3ByaWF0ZS4gIFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXBzIGNvbWUgdXAgd2l0aCBh ZCBob2Mgc29sdXRpb25zLiAgRm9yDQogICBleGFtcGxlLCBtYW55IGRyYWZ0 IHN1YnZlcnNpb25zIGFyZSAidGVtcG9yYXJ5IiBwdWJsaXNoZWQgb24gcGVy c29uYWwNCiAgIHdlYiBzaXRlcyBvciBwb3N0ZWQgKGNvbXBsZXRlbHkgb3Ig aW4gcGFydCkgdG8gdGhlIGdyb3VwIGxpc3QuDQogICBPZnRlbiwgYWx0ZXJu YXRpdmUgbWVhbnMgb2YgcHVibGljYXRpb24gZWZmZWN0aXZlbHkgcmVwbGFj ZSBvZmZpY2lhbA0KICAgSUVURiBpbnRlcmZhY2VzIGFuZCBvbmx5IGEgZmV3 IG1ham9yIGRyYWZ0IHJldmlzaW9ucyBlbmQgdXAgYmVpbmcNCiAgIHB1Ymxp c2hlZCBvbiBJRVRGIHdlYiBzaXRlLg0KDQogICBBbnlib2R5IGFuZCBhbnl0 aGluZyBjYW4gc3VibWl0IGEgZHJhZnQgZm9yIHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uLiAgVGhl cmUgaXMgbm8NCiAgIHJlbGlhYmxlIGF1dGhlbnRpY2F0aW9uIG1lY2hhbmlz bS4gIEluaXRpYWwgc3VibWlzc2lvbnMgb2YgV0cgZHJhZnRzDQogICByZXF1 aXJlIFdHIENoYWlyIGFwcHJvdmFsLCB3aGljaCBpcyBhcyBlYXN5IHRvIGZh a2UgYXMgdGhlIHN1Ym1pc3Npb24NCiAgIHJlcXVlc3QgaXRzZWxmLg0KDQoN Cg0KUm91c3Nrb3YgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBFeHBpcmVzIEZlYnJ1YXJ5IDIz LCAyMDA1ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFtQYWdlIDNdDQoMDQpJbnRlcm5ldC1E cmFmdCAgICBEcmFmdCBTdWJtaXNzaW9uIEludGVyZmFjZSBSZXF1aXJlbWVu dHMgICAgQXVndXN0IDIwMDQNCg0KDQogICBMYWNrIG9mIGF1dGhlbnRpY2F0 aW9uIGlzIG5vdCBwZXJjZWl2ZWQgYXMgYSBzZXJpb3VzIHByb2JsZW0sDQog ICBwb3NzaWJseSBiZWNhdXNlIHNlcmlvdXMgZmFsc2lmaWNhdGlvbnMgYXJl IGxpa2VseSB0byBiZSBub3RpY2VkDQogICBiZWZvcmUgc2VyaW91cyBkYW1h Z2UgY2FuIGJlIGRvbmUuICBEdWUgdG8gaW5mb3JtYWwgYW5kIG1hbnVhbCBu YXR1cmUNCiAgIG9mIHRoZSBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIG1lY2hhbmlzbSwgYSBtYXNz aXZlIGF1dG9tYXRlZCBhYnVzZSBvZiB0aGUNCiAgIGludGVyZmFjZSBpcyB1 bmxpa2VseSB0byBjYXVzZSBhbnl0aGluZyBidXQgYSBzaG9ydCBkZW5pYWwg b2YgZHJhZnQNCiAgIHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIHNlcnZpY2UgYW5kLCBoZW5jZSwg aXMgcHJvYmFibHkgbm90IHdvcnRoIGRlZmVuZGluZw0KICAgYWdhaW5zdC4g IEhvd2V2ZXIsIGZ1dHVyZSBhdXRvbWF0aW9uIG1heSByZXN1bHQgaW4gYSBk aWZmZXJlbnQgdHJhZGUNCiAgIG9mZi4NCg0KMy4gIFNjb3BlDQoNCiAgIFRC RDogSW4gc2NvcGUgYXJlIGludGVyZmFjZShzKSB0byBzdWJtaXQgdGhlIGRy YWZ0IGFuZCByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMNCiAgIG9uIHN1Ym1pdHRlZCBkcmFmdCBy ZXZpZXcsIGFwcHJvdmFsL3JlamVjdGlvbiwgYW5kIHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uLiAg T3V0DQogICBvZiBzY29wZSBhcmUgdGhpbmdzIGxpa2UgbGlua2luZyByZWxh dGVkIGRyYWZ0cywgZHJhZnQgcGVyc2lzdGVuY3kvDQogICBhcmNoaXZpbmcs IHByb3ZpZGluZyBhICJtb25pdG9yIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQiIHNlcnZpY2UsIGFu ZCBzcGVjaWZpY3Mgb2YNCiAgIGF1dGhlbnRpY2F0aW5nIGRyYWZ0IHN1Ym1p c3Npb25zLg0KDQo0LiAgVGVybWlub2xvZ3kNCg0KICAgVGhlIGtleXdvcmRz ICJNVVNUIiwgIk1VU1QgTk9UIiwgIlJFUVVJUkVEIiwgIlNIQUxMIiwgIlNI QUxMIE5PVCIsDQogICAiU0hPVUxEIiwgIlNIT1VMRCBOT1QiLCAiUkVDT01N RU5ERUQiLCAiTUFZIiwgYW5kICJPUFRJT05BTCIgaW4gdGhpcw0KICAgZG9j dW1lbnQgYXJlIHRvIGJlIGludGVycHJldGVkIGFzIGRlc2NyaWJlZCBpbiBb UkZDMjExOV0uICBXaGVuIHVzZWQNCiAgIHdpdGggdGhlIG5vcm1hdGl2ZSBt ZWFuaW5ncywgdGhlc2Uga2V5d29yZHMgd2lsbCBiZSBhbGwgdXBwZXJjYXNl Lg0KICAgT2NjdXJyZW5jZXMgb2YgdGhlc2Ugd29yZHMgaW4gbG93ZXJjYXNl IGNvbXByaXNlIG5vcm1hbCBwcm9zZSB1c2FnZSwNCiAgIHdpdGggbm8gbm9y bWF0aXZlIGltcGxpY2F0aW9ucy4NCg0KICAgU3VibWl0dGVyOiBBIGh1bWFu IG9yIHNvZnR3YXJlIHN1Ym1pdHRpbmcgYW4gSW50ZXJuZXQgRHJhZnQgZm9y DQogICAgICBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbi4gIEEgaHVtYW4gc3VibWl0dGVyIGlzIGxp a2VseSB0byB1c2Ugc29tZSBhdXRvbWF0aW9uDQogICAgICB0b29scyAoZS5n LiwgYW4gZS1tYWlsIGNsaWVudCksIGJ1dCBkaWZmZXJzIGZyb20gdGhlIHNv ZnR3YXJlDQogICAgICBzdWJtaXR0ZXIgaW4gdGhhdCBpdCBpcyBhIGh1bWFu IHdobyBleHBsaWNpdGx5IGluaXRpYXRlcyB0aGUNCiAgICAgIHN1Ym1pc3Np b24gcHJvY2VzcyBhbmQgaW50ZXJwcmV0cyBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIHJlc3VsdHMu DQoNCiAgIFB1Ymxpc2hlcjogQSBodW1hbiBvciBzb2Z0d2FyZSB2YWxpZGF0 aW5nIGFuZCBwdWJsaXNoaW5nIGEgc3VibWl0dGVkDQogICAgICBJbnRlcm5l dCBEcmFmdC4gIEEgaHVtYW4gcHVibGlzaGVyIGlzIGxpa2VseSB0byB1c2Ug c29tZQ0KICAgICAgYXV0b21hdGlvbiB0b29scyAoZS5nLiwgYSB2YWxpZGF0 aW9uIHRvb2wpLCBidXQgZGlmZmVycyBmcm9tIHRoZQ0KICAgICAgc29mdHdh cmUgcHVibGlzaGVyIGluIHRoYXQgaXQgaXMgYSBodW1hbiB3aG8gZXhwbGlj aXRseSBpbml0aWF0ZXMNCiAgICAgIHRoZSB2YWxpZGF0aW9uL3B1YmxpY2F0 aW9uIHByb2Nlc3MgYW5kIGludGVycHJldHMgaXRzIHJlc3VsdHMuDQoNCg0K NS4gIE1vZGVzDQoNCiAgIFRvb2wgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzIGRlcGVuZCBvbiB0 aGUgc3VibWlzc2lvbiBhbmQgcHVibGljYXRpb24gbW9kZS4gIElEDQogICBz dWJtaXNzaW9uIHRvb2wgTVVTVCBzdXBwb3J0IGFsbCB0aHJlZSBtb2RlcyBk b2N1bWVudGVkIGluIHRoaXMNCiAgIHNlY3Rpb24uICBTdXBwb3J0aW5nIGRp ZmZlcmVudCBtb2RlcyBtYXkgY2FsbCBmb3IgY3JlYXRpb24gb2YNCiAgIGRp ZmZlcmVudCB0b29scy4gIChYWFg6IGFyZSBhbGwgbW9kZXMgaW4gc2NvcGU/ KSAoWFhYOiBpcyB0aGVyZSBhDQogICBiZXR0ZXIgdGVybSB0aGFuIG1vZGU/ KQ0KDQogICAoWFhYOiBuZWVkIHRvIGRvIGEgbXVjaCBiZXR0ZXIgam9iIGF0 IHNob3dpbmcgd2hhdCByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgYXBwbHkNCg0KDQoNClJvdXNz a292ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgRXhwaXJlcyBGZWJydWFyeSAyMywgMjAwNSAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICBbUGFnZSA0XQ0KDA0KSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnQgICAg RHJhZnQgU3VibWlzc2lvbiBJbnRlcmZhY2UgUmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzICAgIEF1 Z3VzdCAyMDA0DQoNCg0KICAgdG8gd2hhdCB0b29scyBvciB0b29sIHBhcnRz OyB3ZSBhcmUgbGFja2luZyBnb29kIHRlcm1pbm9sb2d5IGhlcmUpLg0KDQo1 LjEgIEZ1bGwgYXV0b21hdGlvbiBtb2RlDQoNCiAgIFN1Ym1pc3Npb24gaW50 ZXJmYWNlIFNIT1VMRCBzdXBwb3J0IGRyYWZ0IHN1Ym1pc3Npb25zIGJ5IHNv ZnR3YXJlDQogICBzdWJtaXR0ZXIgdG8gc29mdHdhcmUgcHVibGlzaGVyLiAg Rm9yIGV4YW1wbGUsIGl0IHNob3VsZCBiZSBwb3NzaWJsZQ0KICAgdG8gY29u ZmlndXJlIGRlY2VudCBjb250ZW50IG1hbmFnZW1lbnQgc29mdHdhcmUgdG8g YXV0b21hdGljYWxseQ0KICAgc3VibWl0IGFuZCBpbnN0YW50bHkgcHVibGlz aCB0aGUgZHJhZnQgd2hlbmV2ZXIgYSBuZXcgcmV2aXNpb24gb2YgdGhlDQog ICBkcmFmdCB0ZXh0IGlzIGNoZWNrZWQgaW4uDQoNCiAgIEltcGxlbWVudGlu ZyBhIENHSSBpbnRlcmZhY2UgZm9yIFBPU1RpbmcgZHJhZnQgdGV4dCBhbmQg bWV0YQ0KICAgYXR0cmlidXRlcyB0byBhIHdlbGwta25vd24gSUVURiBVUkwg d291bGQgYmUgb25lIHdheSB0byBhY2NvbW1vZGF0ZSBhDQogICBzb2Z0d2Fy ZSBzdWJtaXR0ZXIgKFhYWDogYWRkIFdlYkRBViBhcyBhbm90aGVyIGV4YW1w bGU/KS4gIFRoZQ0KICAgc29mdHdhcmUtZnJpZW5kbHkgb3V0Y29tZSBvZiB0 aGUgc3VibWlzc2lvbiBjYW4gdGhlbiBiZSBleHByZXNzZWQgdmlhDQogICBI VFRQIHN0YXR1cyBjb2RlcyAoZS5nLiwgYW55IGNvZGUgb3RoZXIgdGhhbiAy MDAgb3IgMjAxIHdvdWxkDQogICBpbmRpY2F0ZSBhIGZhaWx1cmUpLg0KDQog ICBUaGUgInNvZnR3YXJlIHB1Ymxpc2hlciIgcGFydCBvZiB0aGUgcmVxdWly ZW1lbnQgaW1wbGllcyB0aGF0DQogICBzdWJtaXR0ZWQgZHJhZnQgaXMgcHVi bGlzaGVkIG9yIHJlamVjdGVkIHdpdGhvdXQgYW55IGh1bWFuDQogICBpbnZv bHZlbWVudC4NCg0KNS4yICBQdWJsaWNhdGlvbiBhdXRvbWF0aW9uIG1vZGUN Cg0KICAgU3VibWlzc2lvbiBpbnRlcmZhY2UgTVVTVCBzdXBwb3J0IGRyYWZ0 IHN1Ym1pc3Npb24gYnkgYSBodW1hbg0KICAgc3VibWl0dGVyIHRvIHNvZnR3 YXJlIHB1Ymxpc2hlci4gIEZvciBleGFtcGxlLCBpdCBzaG91bGQgYmUgcG9z c2libGUNCiAgIGZvciB0aGUgZHJhZnQgYXV0aG9yIHRvIHN1Ym1pdCBhbmQg aW5zdGFudGx5IHB1Ymxpc2ggdGhlIGRyYWZ0DQogICB3aGVuZXZlciB0aGUg YXV0aG9yIGZlZWxzIHRoYXQgdGhlIG5ldyByZXZpc2lvbiBvZiB0aGUgZHJh ZnQgc2hvdWxkDQogICBiZSBwdWJsaXNoZWQuDQoNCiAgIEltcGxlbWVudGlu ZyBhIGh1bWFuLWZyaWVuZGx5IGVhc3ktdG8tZmluZCB3ZWIgcGFnZSB3aGVy ZSB0aGUgZHJhZnQNCiAgIHRleHQgY2FuIGJlIHVwbG9hZGVkIGFsb25nIHdp dGggbWV0YSBhdHRyaWJ1dGVzIHdvdWxkIGJlIG9uZSB3YXkgdG8NCiAgIHNh dGlzZnkgdGhpcyByZXF1aXJlbWVudC4gIEEgaHVtYW4tb3JpZW50ZWQgc3Rh dHVzIHBhZ2UgY2FuIGJlDQogICByZXR1cm5lZCB0byBpbmRpY2F0ZSB0aGUg cmVzdWx0IG9mIHRoZSBzdWJtaXNzaW9uLg0KDQogICBUaGUgInNvZnR3YXJl IHB1Ymxpc2hlciIgcGFydCBvZiB0aGUgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnQgaW1wbGllcyB0 aGF0DQogICBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIGlzIHB1Ymxpc2hlZCBvciByZWplY3RlZCB3 aXRob3V0IGFueSBodW1hbiBpbnZvbHZlbWVudC4NCg0KNS4zICBIdW1hbi10 by1odW1hbiBtb2RlDQoNCiAgIFN1Ym1pc3Npb24gaW50ZXJmYWNlIE1VU1Qg c3VwcG9ydCBkcmFmdCBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIGJ5IGEgaHVtYW4gdG8gYQ0KICAg aHVtYW4sIHBvc3NpYmx5IGFzIGEgbGFzdC1yZXNvcnQsIGRpc2NvdXJhZ2Vk IG9wdGlvbi4gIEZvciBleGFtcGxlLA0KICAgU2VjcmV0YXJpYXQgbWF5IHBy b3ZpZGUgYSBodW1hbi1tb25pdG9yZWQgZS1tYWlsIGFkZHJlc3Mgd2hlcmUg ZHJhZnRzDQogICBjYW4gYmUgbWFpbGVkIGJ5cGFzc2luZyBhdXRvbWF0ZWQg cHVibGlzaGVycy4NCg0KICAgVXNpbmcgdGhpcyBtb2RlIG1heSByZXN1bHQg aW4gc2lnbmlmaWNhbnQgcHVibGljYXRpb24gZGVsYXlzLiAgVGhlDQogICBo dW1hbi1hc3Npc3RlZCBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIGFuZCBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbiBtZWNo YW5pc20gTUFZIHVzZSBzb21lDQogICBhdXRvbWF0aW9uIChlLmcuLCBhdXRv bWF0aWMgc3BhbSBkZXRlY3Rpb24gZm9yIGUtbWFpbCBzdWJtaXNzaW9ucyku DQogICBJZiBhdXRvbWF0aW9uIGlzIHVzZWQgYnkgZGVmYXVsdCwgdGhlIG1l Y2hhbmlzbSBNVVNUIHByb3ZpZGUgYSB3YXkNCg0KDQoNClJvdXNza292ICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgRXhwaXJlcyBGZWJydWFyeSAyMywgMjAwNSAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICBbUGFnZSA1XQ0KDA0KSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnQgICAgRHJhZnQg U3VibWlzc2lvbiBJbnRlcmZhY2UgUmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzICAgIEF1Z3VzdCAy MDA0DQoNCg0KICAgZm9yIGEgaHVtYW4gc3VibWl0dGVyIHRvIGJ5cGFzcyB0 aGF0IGF1dG9tYXRpb24gKGUuZy4sIGEga2V5d29yZCBpbg0KICAgZS1tYWls IHN1YmplY3Qgd2lsbCB0dXJuIHNwYW0gZmlsdGVyaW5nIG9mZikuDQoNCiAg IFRoZSBpbnRlbnQgb2YgdGhpcyBtb2RlIGlzIHRvIHByb3ZpZGUgYSB3YXkg Zm9yIHN1Ym1pdHRlcnMgdG8gYnlwYXNzDQogICBidWdzIG9yIGxpbWl0YXRp b25zIG9mIGF1dG9tYXRlZCBtZWNoYW5pc21zIGluIG9yZGVyIHRvIHB1Ymxp c2ggYW4NCiAgIHVudXN1YWwgZHJhZnQgb3IgdG8gcHVibGlzaCBhIGRyYWZ0 IHVuZGVyIHVudXN1YWwgY2lyY3Vtc3RhbmNlcy4NCg0KNS40ICBEcnkgUnVu IG1vZGUNCg0KICAgVEJEOiBKdXN0IHZhbGlkYXRpb24sIG5vIHB1YmxpY2F0 aW9uLg0KDQo1LjUgIE1vZGUgYXV0b21hdGlvbiBtYXRyaXgNCg0KICAgVGhl IGZvbGxvd2luZyB0YWJsZSBzdW1tYXJpemVzIGF1dG9tYXRpb24gcnVsZXMg Zm9yIHRoZSBtYWpvciBtb2Rlcy4NCg0KICAgICAgICAgKy0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLSstLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0rLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLSsNCiAg ICAgICAgIHwgTW9kZSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICB8IFN1Ym1pc3Npb24g fCBQdWJsaWNhdGlvbiB8DQogICAgICAgICArLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tKy0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLSstLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tKw0KICAgICAgICAg fCBGdWxsIGF1dG9tYXRpb24gICAgICAgIHwgIHNvZnR3YXJlICB8ICAgc29m dHdhcmUgIHwNCiAgICAgICAgIHwgUHVibGljYXRpb24gYXV0b21hdGlvbiB8 ICAgIGh1bWFuICAgfCAgIHNvZnR3YXJlICB8DQogICAgICAgICB8IEh1bWFu IHRvIGh1bWFuICAgICAgICAgfCAgICBodW1hbiAgIHwgICAgaHVtYW4gICAg fA0KICAgICAgICAgKy0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLSstLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0rLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLSsNCg0KDQo2LiAgRHJhZnQgVmFsaWRhdGlv bg0KDQogICBJRVRGIHN0YW5kYXJkcyBoYXZlIHRvIGZvbGxvdyBhIHNldCBv ZiBzeW50YXggYW5kIHNlbWFudGljcw0KICAgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzIChYWFg6 IHByb3ZpZGUgcmVmZXJlbmNlcyB0byB0aGUgbml0cyBkb2N1bWVudCBhbmQg SVANCiAgIHBvbGljaWVzKS4gIE1vc3Qgb2YgdGhvc2UgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRz IGFyZSBub3QgZW5mb3JjZWQgZm9yIEludGVybmV0DQogICBEcmFmdHMuICBI b3dldmVyLCBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdGhlbSBtYXkgaW1wcm92ZSBkcmFmdCBxdWFs aXR5LCByZWR1Y2UNCiAgIElFU0cgbG9hZCwgYW5kIGluY3JlYXNlIHRoZSBj aGFuY2VzIG9mIHRoZSBkcmFmdCBiZWluZyBhcHByb3ZlZCBhcyBhbg0KICAg UkZDLiAgRHJhZnQgc3VibWlzc2lvbiBtZWNoYW5pc20gTVVTVCB2YWxpZGF0 ZSB0aGUgZHJhZnRzLiAgSW4gY2FzZQ0KICAgb2YgYSBodW1hbi10by1odW1h biBpbnRlcmZhY2UsIHN1Y2ggdmFsaWRhdGlvbiBtYXkgYmUgaW5pdGlhdGVk IGJ5DQogICB0aGUgaHVtYW4gcHVibGlzaGVyLg0KDQogICBXaGVuIHZhbGlk YXRpbmcgYSBnaXZlbiBkcmFmdCwgaXQgaXMgaW1wb3J0YW50IHRvIGRpc3Rp bmd1aXNoIGJldHdlZW4NCiAgIGFic29sdXRlIHJlcXVpcmVtZW50cyBhbmQg ZGVzaXJhYmxlIGRyYWZ0IHByb3BlcnRpZXMuICBCb3RoIGFyZQ0KICAgZGV0 YWlsZWQgaW4gdGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZyBzdWJzZWN0aW9ucy4NCg0KNi4xICBB YnNvbHV0ZSByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMNCg0KICAgQSBkcmFmdCB2YWxpZGF0b3Ig TVVTVCBjaGVjayB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIHJlcXVpcmVtZW50cyBhbmQgYSBk cmFmdA0KICAgcHVibGlzaGVyIE1VU1QgTk9UIHB1Ymxpc2ggZHJhZnRzIHRo YXQgZmFpbGVkIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRpbmcgdmFsaWRhdG9yDQogICBjaGVja3Mu DQoNCiAgIDEuICBBIGRyYWZ0IG11c3QgYmUgc3VibWl0dGVkIGJ5IGl0cyBh dXRob3IsIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRpbmcgd29ya2luZw0KICAgICAgIGdyb3VwIGNo YWlyLCBvciBjb3JyZXNwb25kaW5nIGFyZWEgZGlyZWN0b3IgKFhYWDogaXMg dGhpcyB0aGUNCiAgICAgICByaWdodCBwbGFjZSB0byBleHBsYWluIHdoeSB3 ZSBuZWVkIEFEIG92ZXJyaWRlIG9wdGlvbiB0byBsZXQgSUVTRw0KDQoNCg0K Um91c3Nrb3YgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBFeHBpcmVzIEZlYnJ1YXJ5IDIzLCAy MDA1ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFtQYWdlIDZdDQoMDQpJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFm dCAgICBEcmFmdCBTdWJtaXNzaW9uIEludGVyZmFjZSBSZXF1aXJlbWVudHMg ICAgQXVndXN0IDIwMDQNCg0KDQogICAgICAgcHVibGlzaCBkcmFmdCBmaXhl cz8pLg0KDQogICAyLiAgVGhlIGluaXRpYWwgcmV2aXNpb24gb2YgYSBXb3Jr aW5nIEdyb3VwIGRyYWZ0IG11c3QgYmUgc3VibWl0dGVkDQogICAgICAgYnkg dGhlIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRpbmcgd29ya2luZyBncm91cCBjaGFpci4NCg0KICAg My4gIEN1cnJlbnQgZHJhZnQgc3RhdGUgbXVzdCBhbGxvdyBuZXcgcmV2aXNp b25zIHRvIGJlIHB1Ymxpc2hlZC4NCiAgICAgICAoWFhYOiBkb2N1bWVudCBJ RVNHIHJldmlldyBzdGF0ZXMgd2hlbiBuZXcgcmV2aXNpb25zIGFyZSBub3QN CiAgICAgICBhbGxvd2VkKS4NCg0KICAgNC4gIENvcnJlY3QgZHJhZnQgbmFt ZSAoaW5jbHVkaW5nIGNvcnJlY3QgcmV2aXNpb24gbnVtYmVyKSBtdXN0DQog ICAgICAgYXBwZWFyIGluIHRoZSBkcmFmdCB0ZXh0Lg0KDQogICA1LiAgQW4g SUVURiBJUFIgc3RhdGVtZW50IG11c3QgYXBwZWFyIGluIHRoZSBkcmFmdCB0 ZXh0LiAgKFhYWDogaXMNCiAgICAgICB0aGlzIGFuIGFic29sdXRlIHJlcXVp cmVtZW50IGZvciBhIGRyYWZ0PykNCg0KICAgKFhYWDogRHJ5IFJ1biBtb2Rl IG1heSBub3QgbmVlZCBtYW55IG9mIHRoZSBhYm92ZSBjaGVja3MsIGRlcGVu ZGluZw0KICAgb24gdXNlciBuZWVkcykNCg0KNi4yICBEZXNpcmVhYmxlIGZl YXR1cmVzDQoNCiAgIEEgZHJhZnQgdmFsaWRhdG9yIFNIT1VMRCBjaGVjayB0 aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIHJlcXVpcmVtZW50cy4gIEEgZHJhZnQNCiAgIHB1Ymxp c2hlciBNQVkgcHVibGlzaCBkcmFmdHMgZmFpbGVkIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRpbmcg dmFsaWRhdG9yIGNoZWNrcy4NCg0KICAgVEJEOiBsaXN0IHRlc3RhYmxlIG5p dHMgaGVyZSBvciByZWZlciB0byB0aGUgbml0cyBkb2N1bWVudC4NCg0KNi4z ICBEcmFmdCB0ZXh0IGludGVycHJldGF0aW9uDQoNCiAgIEEgdmFsaWRhdG9y IE1BWSB0cnkgdG8gcGFydGlhbGx5IGludGVycHJldCB0aGUgZHJhZnQgdGV4 dCBpbiBvcmRlciB0bw0KICAgZXh0cmFjdCBlbWJlZGRlZCBkYXRhIHN1Y2gg YXMgZHJhZnQgbmFtZSBvciBzZWN1cml0eSBzZWN0aW9uLiAgV2hlbg0KICAg Y29ycmVzcG9uZGluZyBtZXRhZGF0YSBpcyBzdXBwbGllZCBieSB0aGUgc3Vi bWl0dGVyLCB0aGUgdmFsaWRhdG9yDQogICBjYW4gY29tcGFyZSB0aGUgZXh0 cmFjdGVkIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIHdpdGggc3VwcGxpZWQgbWV0YWRhdGEuICBU aGUNCiAgIGFic2VuY2Ugb2YgaWRlbnRpZmlhYmxlIGVtYmVkZGVkIGluZm9y bWF0aW9uIG1heSB0cmlnZ2VyIHZhbGlkYXRpb24NCiAgIGVycm9ycyBvciB3 YXJuaW5ncy4NCg0KICAgRXh0cmFjdGlvbiBvZiBlbWJlZGRlZCBpbmZvcm1h dGlvbiBtYXkgd29yayB2ZXJ5IHdlbGwgZm9yIHNvbWUgZHJhZnQNCiAgIGZv cm1hdHMgKGUuZy4sIHRob3NlIHByb2R1Y2VkIGJ5IGFuIHhtbDJyZmMgdG9v bCAoWFhYOiAgYWRkDQogICByZWZlcmVuY2UpKSwgYnV0IGl0IGlzIGltcG9z c2libGUgdG8gcmVsaWFibHkgaWRlbnRpZnkgdGhlIGZvcm1hdCBvZg0KICAg YSBwbGFpbiB0ZXh0IHN1Ym1pc3Npb24uDQoNCjcuICBTdWJtaXNzaW9uIE1l dGFkYXRhDQoNCiAgIFRCRDogZG9jdW1lbnQgd2hhdCBtZXRhZGF0YSBtdXN0 IGJlIHN1cHBsaWVkOiBkcmFmdCBuYW1lIChpbmNsdWRpbmcNCiAgIHJldmlz aW9uIG51bWJlciksIHN1Ym1pdHRlciBjcmVkZW50aWFscywgaXMgdGhpcyB0 aGUgbGFzdCByZXZpc2lvbiBvZg0KICAgdGhlIGRyYWZ0ICh0byBiZSBzdWJt aXR0ZWQgZm9yIElFVEYgbGFzdCBjYWxsIGFuZCBJRVNHIHJldmlldyksDQog ICBmb3JtYXQsIGNvbnRlbnQtZW5jb2RpbmcsIGV0Yy4NCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoN ClJvdXNza292ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgRXhwaXJlcyBGZWJydWFyeSAyMywg MjAwNSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBbUGFnZSA3XQ0KDA0KSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJh ZnQgICAgRHJhZnQgU3VibWlzc2lvbiBJbnRlcmZhY2UgUmVxdWlyZW1lbnRz ICAgIEF1Z3VzdCAyMDA0DQoNCg0KOC4gIFNlY3VyaXR5IENvbnNpZGVyYXRp b25zDQoNCiAgIFNvbWUuICBUQkQ6IFRhbGsgYWJvdXQgd2h5IGF1dGhlbnRp Y2F0aW9uIGFuZCBhbnRpLXNwYW0gbWVhc3VyZXMNCiAgIGJlY29tZSBpbXBv cnRhbnQgb25jZSB0aGluZ3MgYmVjb21lIGF1dG9tYXRlZC4NCg0KOS4gIElB TkEgQ29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnMNCg0KICAgTm9uZS4NCg0KMTAuICBDb21wbGlh bmNlDQoNCiAgIFRCRDogV2hhdCBkb2VzIGl0IG1lYW4gdG8gYmUgY29tcGxp YW50IHdpdGggKHRvIHNhdGlzZnkpIG91cg0KICAgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzPw0K DQpBcHBlbmRpeCBBLiAgQWNrbm93bGVkZ21lbnRzDQoNCiAgIFRCRC4NCg0K ICAgU3BlY2lhbCB0aGFua3MgdG8gTWFyc2hhbGwgUm9zZSBmb3IgaGlzIHht bDJyZmMgdG9vbC4NCg0KQXBwZW5kaXggQi4gIENoYW5nZSBMb2cNCg0KICAg UkZDIEVkaXRvciBOb3RlOiBUaGlzIHNlY3Rpb24gaXMgdG8gYmUgcmVtb3Zl ZCBkdXJpbmcgdGhlIGZpbmFsDQogICBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbiBvZiB0aGUgZG9j dW1lbnQuDQoNCiAgIEludGVybmFsIFdHIHJldmlzaW9uIGNvbnRyb2wgSUQ6 ICRJZDogaWQueG1sLHYgMS40IDIwMDQvMDgvMjUNCiAgIDE3OjIxOjQzIHJv dXNza292IEV4cCAkDQoNCiAgIDIwMDQvMDgvMjUNCg0KICAgICAgKiAgSW5p dGlhbCByZXZpc2lvbi4NCg0KDQoxMSAgTm9ybWF0aXZlIFJlZmVyZW5jZXMN Cg0KICAgW1JGQzIxMTldICBCcmFkbmVyLCBTLiwgIktleSB3b3JkcyBmb3Ig dXNlIGluIFJGQ3MgdG8gSW5kaWNhdGUNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgUmVxdWly ZW1lbnQgTGV2ZWxzIiwgQkNQIDE0LCBSRkMgMjExOSwgTWFyY2ggMTk5Ny4N Cg0KDQpBdXRob3IncyBBZGRyZXNzDQoNCiAgIEFsZXggUm91c3Nrb3YNCiAg IFRoZSBNZWFzdXJlbWVudCBGYWN0b3J5DQoNCiAgIEVNYWlsOiByb3Vzc2tv dkBtZWFzdXJlbWVudC1mYWN0b3J5LmNvbQ0KICAgVVJJOiAgIGh0dHA6Ly93 d3cubWVhc3VyZW1lbnQtZmFjdG9yeS5jb20vDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KUm91c3Nr b3YgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBFeHBpcmVzIEZlYnJ1YXJ5IDIzLCAyMDA1ICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgIFtQYWdlIDhdDQoMDQpJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdCAgICBE cmFmdCBTdWJtaXNzaW9uIEludGVyZmFjZSBSZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgICAgQXVn dXN0IDIwMDQNCg0KDQpJbnRlbGxlY3R1YWwgUHJvcGVydHkgU3RhdGVtZW50 DQoNCiAgIFRoZSBJRVRGIHRha2VzIG5vIHBvc2l0aW9uIHJlZ2FyZGluZyB0 aGUgdmFsaWRpdHkgb3Igc2NvcGUgb2YgYW55DQogICBJbnRlbGxlY3R1YWwg UHJvcGVydHkgUmlnaHRzIG9yIG90aGVyIHJpZ2h0cyB0aGF0IG1pZ2h0IGJl IGNsYWltZWQgdG8NCiAgIHBlcnRhaW4gdG8gdGhlIGltcGxlbWVudGF0aW9u IG9yIHVzZSBvZiB0aGUgdGVjaG5vbG9neSBkZXNjcmliZWQgaW4NCiAgIHRo aXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgb3IgdGhlIGV4dGVudCB0byB3aGljaCBhbnkgbGljZW5z ZSB1bmRlciBzdWNoIHJpZ2h0cw0KICAgbWlnaHQgb3IgbWlnaHQgbm90IGJl IGF2YWlsYWJsZTsgbm9yIGRvZXMgaXQgcmVwcmVzZW50IHRoYXQgaXQgaGFz DQogICBtYWRlIGFueSBpbmRlcGVuZGVudCBlZmZvcnQgdG8gaWRlbnRpZnkg YW55IHN1Y2ggcmlnaHRzLiAgSW5mb3JtYXRpb24NCiAgIG9uIHRoZSBwcm9j ZWR1cmVzIHdpdGggcmVzcGVjdCB0byByaWdodHMgaW4gUkZDIGRvY3VtZW50 cyBjYW4gYmUNCiAgIGZvdW5kIGluIEJDUCA3OCBhbmQgQkNQIDc5Lg0KDQog ICBDb3BpZXMgb2YgSVBSIGRpc2Nsb3N1cmVzIG1hZGUgdG8gdGhlIElFVEYg U2VjcmV0YXJpYXQgYW5kIGFueQ0KICAgYXNzdXJhbmNlcyBvZiBsaWNlbnNl cyB0byBiZSBtYWRlIGF2YWlsYWJsZSwgb3IgdGhlIHJlc3VsdCBvZiBhbg0K ICAgYXR0ZW1wdCBtYWRlIHRvIG9idGFpbiBhIGdlbmVyYWwgbGljZW5zZSBv ciBwZXJtaXNzaW9uIGZvciB0aGUgdXNlIG9mDQogICBzdWNoIHByb3ByaWV0 YXJ5IHJpZ2h0cyBieSBpbXBsZW1lbnRlcnMgb3IgdXNlcnMgb2YgdGhpcw0K ICAgc3BlY2lmaWNhdGlvbiBjYW4gYmUgb2J0YWluZWQgZnJvbSB0aGUgSUVU RiBvbi1saW5lIElQUiByZXBvc2l0b3J5IGF0DQogICBodHRwOi8vd3d3Lmll dGYub3JnL2lwci4NCg0KICAgVGhlIElFVEYgaW52aXRlcyBhbnkgaW50ZXJl c3RlZCBwYXJ0eSB0byBicmluZyB0byBpdHMgYXR0ZW50aW9uIGFueQ0KICAg Y29weXJpZ2h0cywgcGF0ZW50cyBvciBwYXRlbnQgYXBwbGljYXRpb25zLCBv ciBvdGhlciBwcm9wcmlldGFyeQ0KICAgcmlnaHRzIHRoYXQgbWF5IGNvdmVy IHRlY2hub2xvZ3kgdGhhdCBtYXkgYmUgcmVxdWlyZWQgdG8gaW1wbGVtZW50 DQogICB0aGlzIHN0YW5kYXJkLiAgUGxlYXNlIGFkZHJlc3MgdGhlIGluZm9y bWF0aW9uIHRvIHRoZSBJRVRGIGF0DQogICBpZXRmLWlwckBpZXRmLm9yZy4N Cg0KDQpEaXNjbGFpbWVyIG9mIFZhbGlkaXR5DQoNCiAgIFRoaXMgZG9jdW1l bnQgYW5kIHRoZSBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBjb250YWluZWQgaGVyZWluIGFyZSBw cm92aWRlZCBvbiBhbg0KICAgIkFTIElTIiBiYXNpcyBhbmQgVEhFIENPTlRS SUJVVE9SLCBUSEUgT1JHQU5JWkFUSU9OIEhFL1NIRSBSRVBSRVNFTlRTDQog ICBPUiBJUyBTUE9OU09SRUQgQlkgKElGIEFOWSksIFRIRSBJTlRFUk5FVCBT T0NJRVRZIEFORCBUSEUgSU5URVJORVQNCiAgIEVOR0lORUVSSU5HIFRBU0sg Rk9SQ0UgRElTQ0xBSU0gQUxMIFdBUlJBTlRJRVMsIEVYUFJFU1MgT1IgSU1Q TElFRCwNCiAgIElOQ0xVRElORyBCVVQgTk9UIExJTUlURUQgVE8gQU5ZIFdB UlJBTlRZIFRIQVQgVEhFIFVTRSBPRiBUSEUNCiAgIElORk9STUFUSU9OIEhF UkVJTiBXSUxMIE5PVCBJTkZSSU5HRSBBTlkgUklHSFRTIE9SIEFOWSBJTVBM SUVEDQogICBXQVJSQU5USUVTIE9GIE1FUkNIQU5UQUJJTElUWSBPUiBGSVRO RVNTIEZPUiBBIFBBUlRJQ1VMQVIgUFVSUE9TRS4NCg0KDQpDb3B5cmlnaHQg U3RhdGVtZW50DQoNCiAgIENvcHlyaWdodCAoQykgVGhlIEludGVybmV0IFNv Y2lldHkgKDIwMDQpLiAgVGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBpcyBzdWJqZWN0DQogICB0 byB0aGUgcmlnaHRzLCBsaWNlbnNlcyBhbmQgcmVzdHJpY3Rpb25zIGNvbnRh aW5lZCBpbiBCQ1AgNzgsIGFuZA0KICAgZXhjZXB0IGFzIHNldCBmb3J0aCB0 aGVyZWluLCB0aGUgYXV0aG9ycyByZXRhaW4gYWxsIHRoZWlyIHJpZ2h0cy4N Cg0KDQpBY2tub3dsZWRnbWVudA0KDQogICBGdW5kaW5nIGZvciB0aGUgUkZD IEVkaXRvciBmdW5jdGlvbiBpcyBjdXJyZW50bHkgcHJvdmlkZWQgYnkgdGhl DQogICBJbnRlcm5ldCBTb2NpZXR5Lg0KDQoNCg0KDQpSb3Vzc2tvdiAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgIEV4cGlyZXMgRmVicnVhcnkgMjMsIDIwMDUgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgW1BhZ2UgOV0NCgwNCg== --0-1716868460-1093454848=:49770 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; name="id.html" Content-ID: <20040825112728.E49770@measurement-factory.com> Content-Description: draft-submission.html Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="id.html" Content-Transfer-Encoding: BASE64 PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBIVE1MIDQuMDEg VHJhbnNpdGlvbmFsLy9FTiIgImh0dHA6Ly93d3cudzMub3JnL1RSL2h0bWw0 L2xvb3NlLmR0ZCI+DQo8aHRtbCBsYW5nPSJlbiI+PGhlYWQ+PHRpdGxlPlJl cXVpcmVtZW50cyBmb3INCglJRVRGIERyYWZ0IFN1Ym1pc3Npb24gSW50ZXJm YWNlPC90aXRsZT4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIg Y29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjxtZXRhIG5h bWU9ImRlc2NyaXB0aW9uIiBjb250ZW50PSJSZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgZm9yDQoJ SUVURiBEcmFmdCBTdWJtaXNzaW9uIEludGVyZmFjZSI+DQo8bWV0YSBuYW1l PSJrZXl3b3JkcyIgY29udGVudD0iSUVURiB0b29sLCBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFm dCI+DQo8bWV0YSBuYW1lPSJnZW5lcmF0b3IiIGNvbnRlbnQ9InhtbDJyZmMg djEuMjUgKGh0dHA6Ly94bWwucmVzb3VyY2Uub3JnLykiPg0KPHN0eWxlIHR5 cGU9J3RleHQvY3NzJz4NCjwhLS0NCiAgICBib2R5IHsNCiAgICAgICAgZm9u dC1mYW1pbHk6IHZlcmRhbmEsIGNoYXJjb2FsLCBoZWx2ZXRpY2EsIGFyaWFs LCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmOw0KICAgICAgICBtYXJnaW46IDJlbTsNCiAgICAgICAg Zm9udC1zaXplOiBzbWFsbCA7IGNvbG9yOiAjMDAwMDAwIDsgYmFja2dyb3Vu ZC1jb2xvcjogI2ZmZmZmZiA7IH0NCiAgICAudGl0bGUgeyBjb2xvcjogIzk5 MDAwMDsgZm9udC1zaXplOiB4LWxhcmdlIDsNCiAgICAgICAgZm9udC13ZWln aHQ6IGJvbGQ7IHRleHQtYWxpZ246IHJpZ2h0Ow0KICAgICAgICBmb250LWZh bWlseTogaGVsdmV0aWNhLCBtb25hY28sICJNUyBTYW5zIFNlcmlmIiwgYXJp YWwsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7DQogICAgICAgIGJhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6IHRy YW5zcGFyZW50OyB9DQogICAgLmZpbGVuYW1lIHsgY29sb3I6ICM2NjY2NjY7 IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMThweDsgbGluZS1oZWlnaHQ6IDI4cHg7DQogICAgICAg IGZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OiBib2xkOyB0ZXh0LWFsaWduOiByaWdodDsNCiAgICAg ICAgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IGhlbHZldGljYSwgYXJpYWwsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7 DQogICAgICAgIGJhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6IHRyYW5zcGFyZW50OyB9DQog ICAgdGQucmZjYnVnIHsgYmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjogIzAwMDAwMCA7IHdp ZHRoOiAzMHB4IDsgaGVpZ2h0OiAzMHB4IDsgDQogICAgICAgIHRleHQtYWxp Z246IGp1c3RpZnk7IHZlcnRpY2FsLWFsaWduOiBtaWRkbGUgOyBwYWRkaW5n LXRvcDogMnB4IDsgfQ0KICAgIHRkLnJmY2J1ZyBzcGFuLlJGQyB7IGNvbG9y OiAjNjY2NjY2OyBmb250LXdlaWdodDogYm9sZDsgdGV4dC1kZWNvcmF0aW9u OiBub25lOw0KICAgICAgICBiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLWNvbG9yOiAjMDAwMDAwIDsN CiAgICAgICAgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IG1vbmFjbywgY2hhcmNvYWwsIGdlbmV2 YSwgIk1TIFNhbnMgU2VyaWYiLCBoZWx2ZXRpY2EsIHZlcmRhbmEsIHNhbnMt c2VyaWY7DQogICAgICAgIGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogeC1zbWFsbCA7IH0NCiAgICB0 ZC5yZmNidWcgc3Bhbi5ob3RUZXh0IHsgY29sb3I6ICNmZmZmZmY7IGZvbnQt d2VpZ2h0OiBub3JtYWw7IHRleHQtZGVjb3JhdGlvbjogbm9uZTsNCiAgICAg ICAgdGV4dC1hbGlnbjogY2VudGVyIDsNCiAgICAgICAgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 IGNoYXJjb2FsLCBtb25hY28sIGdlbmV2YSwgIk1TIFNhbnMgU2VyaWYiLCBo ZWx2ZXRpY2EsIHZlcmRhbmEsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7DQogICAgICAgIGZvbnQt c2l6ZTogeC1zbWFsbCA7IGJhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6ICMwMDAwMDA7IH0N Ci8qIGluZm8gY29kZSBmcm9tIFNhbnRhS2xhdXNzIGF0IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cu bWFkYWJvdXRzdHlsZS5jb20vdG9vbHRpcDIuaHRtbCAqLw0KICAgIGRpdiNj b3VudGVye21hcmdpbi10b3A6IDEwMHB4fQ0KDQogICAgYS5pbmZvew0KICAg ICAgICBwb3NpdGlvbjpyZWxhdGl2ZTsgLyp0aGlzIGlzIHRoZSBrZXkqLw0K ICAgICAgICB6LWluZGV4OjI0Ow0KICAgICAgICB0ZXh0LWRlY29yYXRpb246 bm9uZX0NCg0KICAgIGEuaW5mbzpob3Zlcnt6LWluZGV4OjI1OyBiYWNrZ3Jv dW5kLWNvbG9yOiM5OTAwMDAgOyBjb2xvcjogI2ZmZmZmZiA7fQ0KDQogICAg YS5pbmZvIHNwYW57ZGlzcGxheTogbm9uZX0NCg0KICAgIGEuaW5mbzpob3Zl ciBzcGFueyAvKnRoZSBzcGFuIHdpbGwgZGlzcGxheSBqdXN0IG9uIDpob3Zl ciBzdGF0ZSovDQogICAgICAgIGRpc3BsYXk6YmxvY2s7DQogICAgICAgIHBv c2l0aW9uOmFic29sdXRlOw0KICAgICAgICBmb250LXNpemU6IHNtYWxsZXIg Ow0KICAgICAgICB0b3A6MmVtOyBsZWZ0OjJlbTsgd2lkdGg6MTVlbTsNCiAg ICAgICAgcGFkZGluZzogMnB4IDsNCiAgICAgICAgYm9yZGVyOjFweCBzb2xp ZCAjMzMzMzMzOw0KICAgICAgICBiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLWNvbG9yOiNlZWVlZWU7 IGNvbG9yOiM5OTAwMDA7DQogICAgICAgIHRleHQtYWxpZ246IGxlZnQgO30N Cg0KICAgICBBIHsgZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6IGJvbGQ7IH0NCiAgICAgQTpsaW5r IHsgY29sb3I6ICM5OTAwMDA7IGJhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6IHRyYW5zcGFy ZW50IDsgfQ0KICAgICBBOnZpc2l0ZWQgeyBjb2xvcjogIzMzMzMzMzsgYmFj a2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjogdHJhbnNwYXJlbnQgOyB9DQogICAgIEE6YWN0aXZl IHsgY29sb3I6ICMzMzMzMzM7IGJhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6IHRyYW5zcGFy ZW50IDsgfQ0KDQogICAgcCB7IG1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OiAyZW07IG1hcmdpbi1y aWdodDogMmVtOyB9DQogICAgcC5jb3B5cmlnaHQgeyBmb250LXNpemU6IHgt c21hbGwgOyB9DQogICAgcC50b2MgeyBmb250LXNpemU6IHNtYWxsIDsgZm9u dC13ZWlnaHQ6IGJvbGQgOyBtYXJnaW4tbGVmdDogM2VtIDt9DQoNCiAgICBz cGFuLmVtcGggeyBmb250LXN0eWxlOiBpdGFsaWM7IH0NCiAgICBzcGFuLnN0 cm9uZyB7IGZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OiBib2xkOyB9DQogICAgc3Bhbi52ZXJiIHsg Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6ICJDb3VyaWVyIE5ldyIsIENvdXJpZXIsIG1vbm9zcGFj ZSA7IH0NCg0KICAgIG9sLnRleHQgeyBtYXJnaW4tbGVmdDogMmVtOyBtYXJn aW4tcmlnaHQ6IDJlbTsgfQ0KICAgIHVsLnRleHQgeyBtYXJnaW4tbGVmdDog MmVtOyBtYXJnaW4tcmlnaHQ6IDJlbTsgfQ0KICAgIGxpIHsgbWFyZ2luLWxl ZnQ6IDNlbTsgIH0NCg0KICAgIHByZSB7IG1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OiAzZW07IGNv bG9yOiAjMzMzMzMzOyAgYmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjogdHJhbnNwYXJlbnQ7 DQogICAgICAgIGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiAiQ291cmllciBOZXciLCBDb3VyaWVy LCBtb25vc3BhY2UgOyBmb250LXNpemU6IHNtYWxsIDsNCiAgICAgICAgfQ0K DQogICAgaDMgeyBjb2xvcjogIzMzMzMzMzsgZm9udC1zaXplOiBtZWRpdW0g Ow0KICAgICAgICBmb250LWZhbWlseTogaGVsdmV0aWNhLCBhcmlhbCwgc2Fu cy1zZXJpZiA7DQogICAgICAgIGJhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6IHRyYW5zcGFy ZW50OyB9DQogICAgaDQgeyBmb250LXNpemU6IHNtYWxsOyBmb250LWZhbWls eTogaGVsdmV0aWNhLCBhcmlhbCwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZiA7IH0NCg0KICAgIHRh YmxlLmJ1ZyB7IHdpZHRoOiAzMHB4IDsgaGVpZ2h0OiAxNXB4IDsgfQ0KICAg IHRkLmJ1ZyB7IGNvbG9yOiAjZmZmZmZmIDsgYmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjog Izk5MDAwMCA7DQogICAgICAgIHRleHQtYWxpZ246IGNlbnRlciA7IHdpZHRo OiAzMHB4IDsgaGVpZ2h0OiAxNXB4IDsNCiAgICAgICAgIH0NCiAgICB0ZC5i dWcgQS5saW5rMiB7IGNvbG9yOiAjZmZmZmZmIDsgZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6IGJv bGQ7DQogICAgICAgIHRleHQtZGVjb3JhdGlvbjogbm9uZTsNCiAgICAgICAg Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IG1vbmFjbywgY2hhcmNvYWwsIGdlbmV2YSwgIk1TIFNh bnMgU2VyaWYiLCBoZWx2ZXRpY2EsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7DQogICAgICAgIGZv bnQtc2l6ZTogeC1zbWFsbCA7IGJhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6IHRyYW5zcGFy ZW50IH0NCg0KICAgIHRkLmhlYWRlciB7IGNvbG9yOiAjZmZmZmZmOyBmb250 LXNpemU6IHgtc21hbGwgOw0KICAgICAgICBmb250LWZhbWlseTogYXJpYWws IGhlbHZldGljYSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgdmVydGljYWwtYWxpZ246IHRvcDsN CiAgICAgICAgYmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjogIzY2NjY2NiA7IHdpZHRoOiAz MyUgOyB9DQogICAgdGQuYXV0aG9yIHsgZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6IGJvbGQ7IG1h cmdpbi1sZWZ0OiA0ZW07IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogeC1zbWFsbCA7IH0NCiAgICB0 ZC5hdXRob3ItdGV4dCB7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogeC1zbWFsbDsgfQ0KICAgIHRh YmxlLmRhdGEgeyB2ZXJ0aWNhbC1hbGlnbjogdG9wIDsgYm9yZGVyLWNvbGxh cHNlOiBjb2xsYXBzZSA7DQogICAgICAgIGJvcmRlci1zdHlsZTogc29saWQg c29saWQgc29saWQgc29saWQgOw0KICAgICAgICBib3JkZXItY29sb3I6IGJs YWNrIGJsYWNrIGJsYWNrIGJsYWNrIDsNCiAgICAgICAgZm9udC1zaXplOiBz bWFsbCA7IHRleHQtYWxpZ246IGNlbnRlciA7IH0NCiAgICB0YWJsZS5kYXRh IHRoIHsgZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6IGJvbGQgOw0KICAgICAgICBib3JkZXItc3R5 bGU6IHNvbGlkIHNvbGlkIHNvbGlkIHNvbGlkIDsNCiAgICAgICAgYm9yZGVy LWNvbG9yOiBibGFjayBibGFjayBibGFjayBibGFjayA7IH0NCiAgICB0YWJs ZS5kYXRhIHRkIHsNCiAgICAgICAgYm9yZGVyLXN0eWxlOiBzb2xpZCBzb2xp ZCBzb2xpZCBzb2xpZCA7DQogICAgICAgIGJvcmRlci1jb2xvcjogIzMzMzMz MyAjMzMzMzMzICMzMzMzMzMgIzMzMzMzMyA7IH0NCg0KICAgIGhyIHsgaGVp Z2h0OiAxcHggfQ0KLS0+DQo8L3N0eWxlPg0KPC9oZWFkPg0KPGJvZHk+DQo8 dGFibGUgc3VtbWFyeT0ibGF5b3V0IiBjZWxscGFkZGluZz0iMCIgY2VsbHNw YWNpbmc9IjIiIGNsYXNzPSJidWciIGFsaWduPSJyaWdodCI+PHRyPjx0ZCBj bGFzcz0iYnVnIj48YSBocmVmPSIjdG9jIiBjbGFzcz0ibGluazIiPiZuYnNw O1RPQyZuYnNwOzwvYT48L3RkPjwvdHI+PC90YWJsZT4NCjx0YWJsZSBzdW1t YXJ5PSJsYXlvdXQiIHdpZHRoPSI2NiUiIGJvcmRlcj0iMCIgY2VsbHBhZGRp bmc9IjAiIGNlbGxzcGFjaW5nPSIwIj48dHI+PHRkPjx0YWJsZSBzdW1tYXJ5 PSJsYXlvdXQiIHdpZHRoPSIxMDAlIiBib3JkZXI9IjAiIGNlbGxwYWRkaW5n PSIyIiBjZWxsc3BhY2luZz0iMSI+DQo8dHI+PHRkIGNsYXNzPSJoZWFkZXIi PlRPT0xTIHRlYW08L3RkPjx0ZCBjbGFzcz0iaGVhZGVyIj5BLiBSb3Vzc2tv djwvdGQ+PC90cj4NCjx0cj48dGQgY2xhc3M9ImhlYWRlciI+SW50ZXJuZXQt RHJhZnQ8L3RkPjx0ZCBjbGFzcz0iaGVhZGVyIj5UaGUgTWVhc3VyZW1lbnQg RmFjdG9yeTwvdGQ+PC90cj4NCjx0cj48dGQgY2xhc3M9ImhlYWRlciI+RXhw aXJlczogRmVicnVhcnkgMjMsIDIwMDU8L3RkPjx0ZCBjbGFzcz0iaGVhZGVy Ij5BdWd1c3QgMjUsIDIwMDQ8L3RkPjwvdHI+DQo8L3RhYmxlPjwvdGQ+PC90 cj48L3RhYmxlPg0KPGRpdiBhbGlnbj0icmlnaHQiPjxzcGFuIGNsYXNzPSJ0 aXRsZSI+PGJyIC8+UmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzIGZvcg0KCUlFVEYgRHJhZnQgU3Vi bWlzc2lvbiBJbnRlcmZhY2U8L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGFsaWduPSJy aWdodCI+PHNwYW4gY2xhc3M9InRpdGxlIj48YnIgLz5kcmFmdC1pZXRmLXRv b2xzLWRyYWZ0LXN1Ym1pc3Npb248L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQoNCjxoMz5TdGF0 dXMgb2YgdGhpcyBNZW1vPC9oMz4NCjxwPg0KVGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBpcyBh biBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdCBhbmQgaXMgc3ViamVjdCB0byBhbGwgcHJvdmlz aW9ucw0Kb2Ygc2VjdGlvbiAzIG9mIFJGQyAzNjY3Lg0KQnkgc3VibWl0dGlu ZyB0aGlzIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0LA0KZWFjaCBhdXRob3IgcmVwcmVzZW50 cyB0aGF0IGFueSBhcHBsaWNhYmxlIHBhdGVudCBvciBvdGhlciBJUFIgY2xh aW1zIG9mIHdoaWNoDQpoZSBvciBzaGUgaXMgYXdhcmUgaGF2ZSBiZWVuIG9y IHdpbGwgYmUgZGlzY2xvc2VkLA0KYW5kIGFueSBvZiB3aGljaCBoZSBvciBz aGUgYmVjb21lIGF3YXJlIHdpbGwgYmUgZGlzY2xvc2VkLA0KaW4gYWNjb3Jk YW5jZSB3aXRoIFJGQyAzNjY4LjwvcD4NCjxwPg0KSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnRz IGFyZSB3b3JraW5nIGRvY3VtZW50cyBvZiB0aGUgSW50ZXJuZXQgRW5naW5l ZXJpbmcNClRhc2sgRm9yY2UgKElFVEYpLCBpdHMgYXJlYXMsIGFuZCBpdHMg d29ya2luZyBncm91cHMuDQpOb3RlIHRoYXQgb3RoZXIgZ3JvdXBzIG1heSBh bHNvIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGUgd29ya2luZyBkb2N1bWVudHMgYXMNCkludGVybmV0 LURyYWZ0cy48L3A+DQo8cD4NCkludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBhcmUgZHJhZnQg ZG9jdW1lbnRzIHZhbGlkIGZvciBhIG1heGltdW0gb2Ygc2l4IG1vbnRocw0K YW5kIG1heSBiZSB1cGRhdGVkLCByZXBsYWNlZCwgb3Igb2Jzb2xldGVkIGJ5 IG90aGVyIGRvY3VtZW50cyBhdCBhbnkgdGltZS4NCkl0IGlzIGluYXBwcm9w cmlhdGUgdG8gdXNlIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBhcyByZWZlcmVuY2UgbWF0 ZXJpYWwgb3IgdG8gY2l0ZQ0KdGhlbSBvdGhlciB0aGFuIGFzICJ3b3JrIGlu IHByb2dyZXNzLiI8L3A+DQo8cD4NClRoZSBsaXN0IG9mIGN1cnJlbnQgSW50 ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnRzIGNhbiBiZSBhY2Nlc3NlZCBhdA0KPGEgaHJlZj0naHR0 cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9pZXRmLzFpZC1hYnN0cmFjdHMudHh0Jz5odHRw Oi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL2lldGYvMWlkLWFic3RyYWN0cy50eHQ8L2E+Ljwv cD4NCjxwPg0KVGhlIGxpc3Qgb2YgSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnQgU2hhZG93IERp cmVjdG9yaWVzIGNhbiBiZSBhY2Nlc3NlZCBhdA0KPGEgaHJlZj0naHR0cDov L3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9zaGFkb3cuaHRtbCc+aHR0cDovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9y Zy9zaGFkb3cuaHRtbDwvYT4uPC9wPg0KPHA+DQpUaGlzIEludGVybmV0LURy YWZ0IHdpbGwgZXhwaXJlIG9uIEZlYnJ1YXJ5IDIzLCAyMDA1LjwvcD4NCg0K PGgzPkNvcHlyaWdodCBOb3RpY2U8L2gzPg0KPHA+DQpDb3B5cmlnaHQgKEMp IFRoZSBJbnRlcm5ldCBTb2NpZXR5ICgyMDA0KS48L3A+DQoNCjxoMz5BYnN0 cmFjdDwvaDM+DQoNCjxwPlRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgc3BlY2lmaWVzIHJlcXVp cmVtZW50cyBmb3IgYW4gSUVURiB0b29sDQoJCWZhY2lsaXRhdGluZyBJbnRl cm5ldC1EcmFmdCBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIGFuZCBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbi4NCjwvcD48 YSBuYW1lPSJ0b2MiPjwvYT48YnIgLz48aHIgLz4NCjxoMz5UYWJsZSBvZiBD b250ZW50czwvaDM+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0idG9jIj4NCjxhIGhyZWY9IiNpbnRy byI+MS48L2E+Jm5ic3A7DQpJbnRyb2R1Y3Rpb248YnIgLz4NCjxhIGhyZWY9 IiN0b29sc3RhdHVzIj4yLjwvYT4mbmJzcDsNClRvb2wgU3RhdHVzIFF1bzxi ciAvPg0KPGEgaHJlZj0iI3Byb3hpZXMtc2NvcGUiPjMuPC9hPiZuYnNwOw0K U2NvcGU8YnIgLz4NCjxhIGhyZWY9IiN0ZXJtcyI+NC48L2E+Jm5ic3A7DQpU ZXJtaW5vbG9neTxiciAvPg0KPGEgaHJlZj0iI3NlY3Rpb25fcmVxdWlyZW1l bnRzX21vZGVzIj41LjwvYT4mbmJzcDsNCk1vZGVzPGJyIC8+DQombmJzcDsm bmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDs8YSBocmVmPSIjc2VjdGlvbl9yZXF1aXJlbWVu dHNfZnVsbGF1dG9fbW9kZSI+NS4xPC9hPiZuYnNwOw0KRnVsbA0KCWF1dG9t YXRpb24gbW9kZTxiciAvPg0KJm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7PGEg aHJlZj0iI3NlY3Rpb25fcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzX3B1YmF1dG9fbW9kZSI+NS4y PC9hPiZuYnNwOw0KUHVibGljYXRpb24NCglhdXRvbWF0aW9uIG1vZGU8YnIg Lz4NCiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOzxhIGhyZWY9IiNzZWN0aW9u X3JlcXVpcmVtZW50c19oMmhfbW9kZSI+NS4zPC9hPiZuYnNwOw0KSHVtYW4t dG8taHVtYW4NCgltb2RlPGJyIC8+DQombmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJz cDs8YSBocmVmPSIjc2VjdGlvbl9yZXF1aXJlbWVudHNfZHJ5X21vZGUiPjUu NDwvYT4mbmJzcDsNCkRyeSBSdW4gbW9kZTxiciAvPg0KJm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7PGEgaHJlZj0iI3NlY3Rpb25fcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzX21v ZGVfbWF0cml4Ij41LjU8L2E+Jm5ic3A7DQpNb2RlIGF1dG9tYXRpb24NCglt YXRyaXg8YnIgLz4NCjxhIGhyZWY9IiNzZWN0aW9uX3JlcXVpcmVtZW50c192 YWxpZGF0b3IiPjYuPC9hPiZuYnNwOw0KRHJhZnQgVmFsaWRhdGlvbjxiciAv Pg0KJm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7PGEgaHJlZj0iI3NlY3Rpb25f cmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzX3ZhbGlkYXRvcl9hYnMiPjYuMTwvYT4mbmJzcDsNCkFi c29sdXRlDQoJcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzPGJyIC8+DQombmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJz cDsmbmJzcDs8YSBocmVmPSIjc2VjdGlvbl9yZXF1aXJlbWVudHNfdmFsaWRh dG9yX2Rlc2lyZSI+Ni4yPC9hPiZuYnNwOw0KRGVzaXJlYWJsZSBmZWF0dXJl czxiciAvPg0KJm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7PGEgaHJlZj0iI3Nl Y3Rpb25fcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzX3ZhbGlkYXRvcl9haSI+Ni4zPC9hPiZuYnNw Ow0KRHJhZnQgdGV4dCBpbnRlcnByZXRhdGlvbjxiciAvPg0KPGEgaHJlZj0i I3NlY3Rpb25fcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzX21ldGFkYXRhIj43LjwvYT4mbmJzcDsN ClN1Ym1pc3Npb24gTWV0YWRhdGE8YnIgLz4NCjxhIGhyZWY9IiNzZWN0aW9u X3NlY3VyaXR5Ij44LjwvYT4mbmJzcDsNClNlY3VyaXR5IENvbnNpZGVyYXRp b25zPGJyIC8+DQo8YSBocmVmPSIjc2VjdGlvbl9pYW5hIj45LjwvYT4mbmJz cDsNCklBTkEgQ29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnM8YnIgLz4NCjxhIGhyZWY9IiNzZWN0 aW9uX2NvbXBsaWFuY2UiPjEwLjwvYT4mbmJzcDsNCkNvbXBsaWFuY2U8YnIg Lz4NCjxhIGhyZWY9IiNzZWN0aW9uX2Fja3MiPkEuPC9hPiZuYnNwOw0KQWNr bm93bGVkZ21lbnRzPGJyIC8+DQo8YSBocmVmPSIjc2VjdGlvbl9jaGFuZ2Vf bG9nIj5CLjwvYT4mbmJzcDsNCkNoYW5nZSBMb2c8YnIgLz4NCjxhIGhyZWY9 IiNyZmMucmVmZXJlbmNlczEiPjExLjwvYT4mbmJzcDsNCk5vcm1hdGl2ZSBS ZWZlcmVuY2VzPGJyIC8+DQo8YSBocmVmPSIjcmZjLmF1dGhvcnMiPiYjMTY3 OzwvYT4mbmJzcDsNCkF1dGhvcidzIEFkZHJlc3M8YnIgLz4NCjxhIGhyZWY9 IiNyZmMuY29weXJpZ2h0Ij4mIzE2Nzs8L2E+Jm5ic3A7DQpJbnRlbGxlY3R1 YWwgUHJvcGVydHkgYW5kIENvcHlyaWdodCBTdGF0ZW1lbnRzPGJyIC8+DQo8 L3A+DQo8YnIgY2xlYXI9ImFsbCIgLz4NCg0KPGEgbmFtZT0iaW50cm8iPjwv YT48YnIgLz48aHIgLz4NCjx0YWJsZSBzdW1tYXJ5PSJsYXlvdXQiIGNlbGxw YWRkaW5nPSIwIiBjZWxsc3BhY2luZz0iMiIgY2xhc3M9ImJ1ZyIgYWxpZ249 InJpZ2h0Ij48dHI+PHRkIGNsYXNzPSJidWciPjxhIGhyZWY9IiN0b2MiIGNs YXNzPSJsaW5rMiI+Jm5ic3A7VE9DJm5ic3A7PC9hPjwvdGQ+PC90cj48L3Rh YmxlPg0KPGEgbmFtZT0icmZjLnNlY3Rpb24uMSI+PC9hPjxoMz4xLiZuYnNw O0ludHJvZHVjdGlvbjwvaDM+DQoNCjxwPlB1Ymxpc2hlZCBJbnRlcm5ldCBE cmFmdHMgYXJlIHByaW1hcnkgbWVhbnMgb2Ygc3RydWN0dXJlZA0KCWNvbW11 bmljYXRpb24gd2l0aGluIElFVEYuIEN1cnJlbnQgSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnQg KElEKSBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIGFuZA0KCXB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIG1lY2hhbmlzbXMg aGluZGVyIGVmZmljaWVudCBhbmQgdGltZWx5IGNvbW11bmljYXRpb24gd2hp bGUNCgljcmVhdGluZyB1bm5lY2Vzc2FyeSBsb2FkIG9uIHRoZSBJRVRGIFNl Y3JldGFyaWF0LiBJRVRGIFRPT0xzIHRlYW0NCglyZWNvbW1lbmRzIGZvcm1h bGl6YXRpb24gYW5kIGF1dG9tYXRpb24gb2YgdGhlIGN1cnJlbnQgbWVjaGFu aXNtcy4NCglUaGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGNvbnRhaW5zIHNwZWNpZmljIGF1dG9t YXRpb24gcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzLg0KPC9wPg0KPGEgbmFtZT0idG9vbHN0YXR1 cyI+PC9hPjxiciAvPjxociAvPg0KPHRhYmxlIHN1bW1hcnk9ImxheW91dCIg Y2VsbHBhZGRpbmc9IjAiIGNlbGxzcGFjaW5nPSIyIiBjbGFzcz0iYnVnIiBh bGlnbj0icmlnaHQiPjx0cj48dGQgY2xhc3M9ImJ1ZyI+PGEgaHJlZj0iI3Rv YyIgY2xhc3M9ImxpbmsyIj4mbmJzcDtUT0MmbmJzcDs8L2E+PC90ZD48L3Ry PjwvdGFibGU+DQo8YSBuYW1lPSJyZmMuc2VjdGlvbi4yIj48L2E+PGgzPjIu Jm5ic3A7VG9vbCBTdGF0dXMgUXVvPC9oMz4NCg0KPHA+VG8gZ2V0IGFuIElu dGVybmV0IERyYWZ0IHB1Ymxpc2hlZCwgYW4gSUVURiBwYXJ0aWNpcGFudCBl LW1haWxzDQoJZHJhZnQgdGV4dCB0byB0aGUgSUVURiBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCwg YWxvbmcgd2l0aCBhbiBpbmZvcm1hbCBub3RlIGFza2luZw0KCXRvIHB1Ymxp c2ggdGhlIGRyYWZ0LiAgU2VjcmV0YXJpYXQgc3RhZmYgcmVhZHMgdGhlIG5v dGUsIHJldmlld3MsIGFuZA0KCXRoZW4gYXBwcm92ZXMgb3IgcmVqZWN0cyB0 aGUgc3VibWlzc2lvbi4gIEFuIGFwcHJvdmVkIGRyYWZ0IGlzDQoJYXV0b21h dGljYWxseSAoWFhYOiBvciBtYW51YWxseT8pICBjb3BpZWQgdG8gSUVURiB3 ZWIgc2l0ZSwgd2l0aCB0aGUNCgljb3JyZXNwb25kaW5nIGFubm91bmNlbWVu dCBzZW50IHRvIGFwcHJvcHJpYXRlIElFVEYgbWFpbGluZw0KCWxpc3Qocyku DQo8L3A+DQo8cD5Db2xsZWN0aXZlbHksIElFVEYgcGFydGljaXBhbnRzIHN1 Ym1pdCB0aG91c2FuZHMgKFhYWDogaXMgdGhlcmUgYSBtb3JlDQoJYWNjdXJh dGUgbnVtYmVyPykgb2YgSW50ZXJuZXQgRHJhZnRzIHBlciB5ZWFyIChYWFg6 IHByb3ZpZGUgaW5kaXZpZHVhbCBhbmQNCglXRyBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIG51bWJl cnMgc2VwYXJhdGVseSkuIFRoZSB2YXN0IG1ham9yaXR5IG9mIHN1Ym1pdHRl ZCBkcmFmdHMNCglhcmUgYXBwcm92ZWQgZm9yIHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIChYWFg6 IGFyZSBzdGF0cyBhdmFpbGFibGU/KS4gSXQgdXN1YWxseSB0YWtlcw0KCXRo ZSBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCAxMi0yNCBob3VycyAoWFhYOiBhcmUgc3RhdHMgYXZh aWxhYmxlPykgIHRvIHJldmlldyB0aGUNCglkcmFmdC4gRHVlIHRvIG11Y2gg aGlnaGVyIGRlbWFuZCBhbmQgZml4ZWQgcHJvY2Vzc2luZyBjYXBhY2l0eSwg cmV2aWV3cw0KCWFyb3VuZCBJRVRGIGZhY2UtdG8tZmFjZSBtZWV0aW5ncyB0 YWtlIG11Y2ggbG9uZ2VyLCBjcmVhdGluZyBhIGxvbmcgcXVldWUNCglvZiB1 bnByb2Nlc3NlZCBkcmFmdHMgdGhhdCBhcmUgdGhlbiBhbm5vdW5jZWQgbmVh cmx5IHNpbXVsdGFuZW91c2x5Lg0KPC9wPg0KPHA+VG8gcmVkdWNlIFNlY3Jl dGFyaWF0IGxvYWQgKFhYWDogYXJlIHRoZXJlIG90aGVyIHJlYXNvbnM/KSwg ZHJhZnRzDQoJc3VibWl0dGVkIGNsb3NlIHRvIElFVEYgbWVldGluZ3MgYXJl IGlnbm9yZWQuDQo8L3A+DQo8cD5JbmZvcm1hbCBpbnRlcmZhY2UgZm9yIHN1 Ym1pdHRpbmcgYW5kIHB1Ymxpc2hpbmcgZHJhZnRzIGRpc2NvdXJhZ2VzDQoJ YXV0b21hdGlvbi4gTGFjayBvZiBhdXRvbWF0aW9uIGRpc2NvdXJhZ2VzIGZy ZXF1ZW50IHVwZGF0ZXMuDQoJSW5mcmVxdWVudCB1cGRhdGVzIGxlYWQgdG8g c3RhbGUgcHVibGlzaGVkIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLg0KPC9wPg0KPHA+RHVyaW5n IHBlcmlvZHMgb2YgaGlnaCBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwIGFjdGl2aXR5LCB0aGUg ZGVsYXlzDQoJYXNzb2NpYXRlZCB3aXRoIGRyYWZ0IHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIHRp bWVzIG1ha2Ugb2ZmaWNpYWwgaW50ZXJmYWNlDQoJZXNwZWNpYWxseSBpbmFw cHJvcHJpYXRlLiBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwcyBjb21lIHVwIHdpdGggYWQgaG9j IHNvbHV0aW9ucy4NCglGb3IgZXhhbXBsZSwgbWFueSBkcmFmdCBzdWJ2ZXJz aW9ucyBhcmUgInRlbXBvcmFyeSIgcHVibGlzaGVkIG9uDQoJcGVyc29uYWwg d2ViIHNpdGVzIG9yIHBvc3RlZCAoY29tcGxldGVseSBvciBpbiBwYXJ0KSB0 byB0aGUgZ3JvdXANCglsaXN0LiBPZnRlbiwgYWx0ZXJuYXRpdmUgbWVhbnMg b2YgcHVibGljYXRpb24gZWZmZWN0aXZlbHkgcmVwbGFjZQ0KCW9mZmljaWFs IElFVEYgaW50ZXJmYWNlcyBhbmQgb25seSBhIGZldyBtYWpvciBkcmFmdCBy ZXZpc2lvbnMgZW5kIHVwDQoJYmVpbmcgcHVibGlzaGVkIG9uIElFVEYgd2Vi IHNpdGUuDQo8L3A+DQo8cD5Bbnlib2R5IGFuZCBhbnl0aGluZyBjYW4gc3Vi bWl0IGEgZHJhZnQgZm9yIHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uLiBUaGVyZSBpcw0KCW5vIHJl bGlhYmxlIGF1dGhlbnRpY2F0aW9uIG1lY2hhbmlzbS4gSW5pdGlhbCBzdWJt aXNzaW9ucyBvZiBXRyBkcmFmdHMNCglyZXF1aXJlIFdHIENoYWlyIGFwcHJv dmFsLCB3aGljaCBpcyBhcyBlYXN5IHRvIGZha2UgYXMgdGhlIHN1Ym1pc3Np b24NCglyZXF1ZXN0IGl0c2VsZi4NCjwvcD4NCjxwPkxhY2sgb2YgYXV0aGVu dGljYXRpb24gaXMgbm90IHBlcmNlaXZlZCBhcyBhIHNlcmlvdXMgcHJvYmxl bSwgcG9zc2libHkNCgliZWNhdXNlIHNlcmlvdXMgZmFsc2lmaWNhdGlvbnMg YXJlIGxpa2VseSB0byBiZSBub3RpY2VkIGJlZm9yZSBzZXJpb3VzDQoJZGFt YWdlIGNhbiBiZSBkb25lLiBEdWUgdG8gaW5mb3JtYWwgYW5kIG1hbnVhbCBu YXR1cmUgb2YgdGhlIHN1Ym1pc3Npb24NCgltZWNoYW5pc20sIGEgbWFzc2l2 ZSBhdXRvbWF0ZWQgYWJ1c2Ugb2YgdGhlIGludGVyZmFjZSBpcyB1bmxpa2Vs eSB0byBjYXVzZQ0KCWFueXRoaW5nIGJ1dCBhIHNob3J0IGRlbmlhbCBvZiBk cmFmdCBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbiBzZXJ2aWNlIGFuZCwgaGVuY2UsIGlzDQoJcHJv YmFibHkgbm90IHdvcnRoIGRlZmVuZGluZyBhZ2FpbnN0LiBIb3dldmVyLCBm dXR1cmUgYXV0b21hdGlvbiBtYXkNCglyZXN1bHQgaW4gYSBkaWZmZXJlbnQg dHJhZGUgb2ZmLg0KPC9wPg0KPGEgbmFtZT0icHJveGllcy1zY29wZSI+PC9h PjxiciAvPjxociAvPg0KPHRhYmxlIHN1bW1hcnk9ImxheW91dCIgY2VsbHBh ZGRpbmc9IjAiIGNlbGxzcGFjaW5nPSIyIiBjbGFzcz0iYnVnIiBhbGlnbj0i cmlnaHQiPjx0cj48dGQgY2xhc3M9ImJ1ZyI+PGEgaHJlZj0iI3RvYyIgY2xh c3M9ImxpbmsyIj4mbmJzcDtUT0MmbmJzcDs8L2E+PC90ZD48L3RyPjwvdGFi bGU+DQo8YSBuYW1lPSJyZmMuc2VjdGlvbi4zIj48L2E+PGgzPjMuJm5ic3A7 U2NvcGU8L2gzPg0KDQo8cD5UQkQ6IEluIHNjb3BlIGFyZSBpbnRlcmZhY2Uo cykgdG8gc3VibWl0IHRoZSBkcmFmdCBhbmQgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzDQoJb24g c3VibWl0dGVkIGRyYWZ0IHJldmlldywgYXBwcm92YWwvcmVqZWN0aW9uLCBh bmQgcHVibGljYXRpb24uIE91dCBvZg0KCXNjb3BlIGFyZSB0aGluZ3MgbGlr ZSBsaW5raW5nIHJlbGF0ZWQgZHJhZnRzLCBkcmFmdA0KCXBlcnNpc3RlbmN5 L2FyY2hpdmluZywgcHJvdmlkaW5nIGEgIm1vbml0b3IgdGhpcyBkcmFmdCIg c2VydmljZSwgYW5kDQoJc3BlY2lmaWNzIG9mIGF1dGhlbnRpY2F0aW5nIGRy YWZ0IHN1Ym1pc3Npb25zLg0KPC9wPg0KPGEgbmFtZT0idGVybXMiPjwvYT48 YnIgLz48aHIgLz4NCjx0YWJsZSBzdW1tYXJ5PSJsYXlvdXQiIGNlbGxwYWRk aW5nPSIwIiBjZWxsc3BhY2luZz0iMiIgY2xhc3M9ImJ1ZyIgYWxpZ249InJp Z2h0Ij48dHI+PHRkIGNsYXNzPSJidWciPjxhIGhyZWY9IiN0b2MiIGNsYXNz PSJsaW5rMiI+Jm5ic3A7VE9DJm5ic3A7PC9hPjwvdGQ+PC90cj48L3RhYmxl Pg0KPGEgbmFtZT0icmZjLnNlY3Rpb24uNCI+PC9hPjxoMz40LiZuYnNwO1Rl cm1pbm9sb2d5PC9oMz4NCg0KPHA+VGhlIGtleXdvcmRzICJNVVNUIiwgIk1V U1QgTk9UIiwgIlJFUVVJUkVEIiwgIlNIQUxMIiwgIlNIQUxMIE5PVCIsDQoJ IlNIT1VMRCIsICJTSE9VTEQgTk9UIiwgIlJFQ09NTUVOREVEIiwgIk1BWSIs IGFuZCAiT1BUSU9OQUwiIGluIHRoaXMNCglkb2N1bWVudCBhcmUgdG8gYmUg aW50ZXJwcmV0ZWQgYXMgZGVzY3JpYmVkIGluIDxhIGNsYXNzPSJpbmZvIiBo cmVmPSIjUkZDMjExOSI+W1JGQzIxMTldPHNwYW4+QnJhZG5lciwgUy4sIEtl eSB3b3JkcyBmb3IgdXNlIGluIFJGQ3MgdG8gSW5kaWNhdGUgUmVxdWlyZW1l bnQgTGV2ZWxzLCBNYXJjaCAxOTk3Ljwvc3Bhbj48L2E+Lg0KCVdoZW4gdXNl ZCB3aXRoIHRoZSBub3JtYXRpdmUgbWVhbmluZ3MsIHRoZXNlIGtleXdvcmRz IHdpbGwgYmUgYWxsDQoJdXBwZXJjYXNlLiAgT2NjdXJyZW5jZXMgb2YgdGhl c2Ugd29yZHMgaW4gbG93ZXJjYXNlIGNvbXByaXNlIG5vcm1hbCBwcm9zZQ0K CXVzYWdlLCB3aXRoIG5vIG5vcm1hdGl2ZSBpbXBsaWNhdGlvbnMuDQo8L3A+ DQo8cD48L3A+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBjbGFzcz0idGV4dCI+PGRsPg0KPGR0 PlN1Ym1pdHRlcjo8L2R0Pg0KPGRkPkEgaHVtYW4gb3Igc29mdHdhcmUgc3Vi bWl0dGluZyBhbiBJbnRlcm5ldA0KCQlEcmFmdCBmb3IgcHVibGljYXRpb24u IEEgaHVtYW4gc3VibWl0dGVyIGlzIGxpa2VseSB0byB1c2Ugc29tZQ0KCQlh dXRvbWF0aW9uIHRvb2xzIChlLmcuLCBhbiBlLW1haWwgY2xpZW50KSwgYnV0 IGRpZmZlcnMgZnJvbSB0aGUNCgkJc29mdHdhcmUgc3VibWl0dGVyIGluIHRo YXQgaXQgaXMgYSBodW1hbiB3aG8gZXhwbGljaXRseSBpbml0aWF0ZXMgdGhl DQoJCXN1Ym1pc3Npb24gcHJvY2VzcyBhbmQgaW50ZXJwcmV0cyBzdWJtaXNz aW9uIHJlc3VsdHMuDQo8L2RkPg0KPGR0PlB1Ymxpc2hlcjo8L2R0Pg0KPGRk PkEgaHVtYW4gb3Igc29mdHdhcmUgdmFsaWRhdGluZyBhbmQgcHVibGlzaGlu Zw0KCQlhIHN1Ym1pdHRlZCBJbnRlcm5ldCBEcmFmdC4gQSBodW1hbiBwdWJs aXNoZXIgaXMgbGlrZWx5IHRvIHVzZSBzb21lDQoJCWF1dG9tYXRpb24gdG9v bHMgKGUuZy4sIGEgdmFsaWRhdGlvbiB0b29sKSwgYnV0IGRpZmZlcnMgZnJv bSB0aGUNCgkJc29mdHdhcmUgcHVibGlzaGVyIGluIHRoYXQgaXQgaXMgYSBo dW1hbiB3aG8gZXhwbGljaXRseSBpbml0aWF0ZXMgdGhlDQoJCXZhbGlkYXRp b24vcHVibGljYXRpb24gcHJvY2VzcyBhbmQgaW50ZXJwcmV0cyBpdHMgcmVz dWx0cy4NCjwvZGQ+DQo8L2RsPjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCg0KPGEgbmFtZT0i c2VjdGlvbl9yZXF1aXJlbWVudHNfbW9kZXMiPjwvYT48YnIgLz48aHIgLz4N Cjx0YWJsZSBzdW1tYXJ5PSJsYXlvdXQiIGNlbGxwYWRkaW5nPSIwIiBjZWxs c3BhY2luZz0iMiIgY2xhc3M9ImJ1ZyIgYWxpZ249InJpZ2h0Ij48dHI+PHRk IGNsYXNzPSJidWciPjxhIGhyZWY9IiN0b2MiIGNsYXNzPSJsaW5rMiI+Jm5i c3A7VE9DJm5ic3A7PC9hPjwvdGQ+PC90cj48L3RhYmxlPg0KPGEgbmFtZT0i cmZjLnNlY3Rpb24uNSI+PC9hPjxoMz41LiZuYnNwO01vZGVzPC9oMz4NCg0K PHA+VG9vbCByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgZGVwZW5kIG9uIHRoZSBzdWJtaXNzaW9u IGFuZCBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbiBtb2RlLiBJRA0KCXN1Ym1pc3Npb24gdG9vbCBN VVNUIHN1cHBvcnQgYWxsIHRocmVlIG1vZGVzIGRvY3VtZW50ZWQgaW4gdGhp cyBzZWN0aW9uLg0KCVN1cHBvcnRpbmcgZGlmZmVyZW50IG1vZGVzIG1heSBj YWxsIGZvciBjcmVhdGlvbiBvZiBkaWZmZXJlbnQgdG9vbHMuIChYWFg6DQoJ YXJlIGFsbCBtb2RlcyBpbiBzY29wZT8pIChYWFg6IGlzIHRoZXJlIGEgYmV0 dGVyIHRlcm0gdGhhbiBtb2RlPykNCjwvcD4NCjxwPihYWFg6IG5lZWQgdG8g ZG8gYSBtdWNoIGJldHRlciBqb2IgYXQgc2hvd2luZyB3aGF0IHJlcXVpcmVt ZW50cyBhcHBseQ0KCXRvIHdoYXQgdG9vbHMgb3IgdG9vbCBwYXJ0czsgd2Ug YXJlIGxhY2tpbmcgZ29vZCB0ZXJtaW5vbG9neSBoZXJlKS4NCjwvcD4NCjxh IG5hbWU9InJmYy5zZWN0aW9uLjUuMSI+PC9hPjxoND48YSBuYW1lPSJzZWN0 aW9uX3JlcXVpcmVtZW50c19mdWxsYXV0b19tb2RlIj41LjE8L2E+Jm5ic3A7 RnVsbA0KCWF1dG9tYXRpb24gbW9kZTwvaDQ+DQoNCjxwPlN1Ym1pc3Npb24g aW50ZXJmYWNlIFNIT1VMRCBzdXBwb3J0IGRyYWZ0IHN1Ym1pc3Npb25zIGJ5 IHNvZnR3YXJlDQoJCXN1Ym1pdHRlciB0byBzb2Z0d2FyZSBwdWJsaXNoZXIu IEZvciBleGFtcGxlLCBpdCBzaG91bGQgYmUgcG9zc2libGUgdG8NCgkJY29u ZmlndXJlIGRlY2VudCBjb250ZW50IG1hbmFnZW1lbnQgc29mdHdhcmUgdG8g YXV0b21hdGljYWxseSBzdWJtaXQNCgkJYW5kIGluc3RhbnRseSBwdWJsaXNo IHRoZSBkcmFmdCB3aGVuZXZlciBhIG5ldyByZXZpc2lvbiBvZiB0aGUgZHJh ZnQNCgkJdGV4dCBpcyBjaGVja2VkIGluLg0KPC9wPg0KPHA+SW1wbGVtZW50 aW5nIGEgQ0dJIGludGVyZmFjZSBmb3IgUE9TVGluZyBkcmFmdCB0ZXh0IGFu ZCBtZXRhDQoJCWF0dHJpYnV0ZXMgdG8gYSB3ZWxsLWtub3duIElFVEYgVVJM IHdvdWxkIGJlIG9uZSB3YXkgdG8gYWNjb21tb2RhdGUgYQ0KCQlzb2Z0d2Fy ZSBzdWJtaXR0ZXIgKFhYWDogYWRkIFdlYkRBViBhcyBhbm90aGVyIGV4YW1w bGU/KS4gIFRoZQ0KCQlzb2Z0d2FyZS1mcmllbmRseSBvdXRjb21lIG9mIHRo ZSBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIGNhbiB0aGVuIGJlIGV4cHJlc3NlZCB2aWENCgkJSFRU UCBzdGF0dXMgY29kZXMgKGUuZy4sIGFueSBjb2RlIG90aGVyIHRoYW4gMjAw IG9yIDIwMSB3b3VsZCBpbmRpY2F0ZQ0KCQlhIGZhaWx1cmUpLg0KPC9wPg0K PHA+VGhlICJzb2Z0d2FyZSBwdWJsaXNoZXIiIHBhcnQgb2YgdGhlIHJlcXVp cmVtZW50IGltcGxpZXMgdGhhdA0KCQlzdWJtaXR0ZWQgZHJhZnQgaXMgcHVi bGlzaGVkIG9yIHJlamVjdGVkIHdpdGhvdXQgYW55IGh1bWFuDQoJCWludm9s dmVtZW50Lg0KPC9wPg0KPGEgbmFtZT0icmZjLnNlY3Rpb24uNS4yIj48L2E+ PGg0PjxhIG5hbWU9InNlY3Rpb25fcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzX3B1YmF1dG9fbW9k ZSI+NS4yPC9hPiZuYnNwO1B1YmxpY2F0aW9uDQoJYXV0b21hdGlvbiBtb2Rl PC9oND4NCg0KPHA+U3VibWlzc2lvbiBpbnRlcmZhY2UgTVVTVCBzdXBwb3J0 IGRyYWZ0IHN1Ym1pc3Npb24gYnkgYSBodW1hbg0KCQlzdWJtaXR0ZXIgdG8g c29mdHdhcmUgcHVibGlzaGVyLiBGb3IgZXhhbXBsZSwgaXQgc2hvdWxkIGJl IHBvc3NpYmxlDQoJCWZvciB0aGUgZHJhZnQgYXV0aG9yIHRvIHN1Ym1pdCBh bmQgaW5zdGFudGx5IHB1Ymxpc2ggdGhlIGRyYWZ0DQoJCXdoZW5ldmVyIHRo ZSBhdXRob3IgZmVlbHMgdGhhdCB0aGUgbmV3IHJldmlzaW9uIG9mIHRoZSBk cmFmdCBzaG91bGQgYmUNCgkJcHVibGlzaGVkLg0KPC9wPg0KPHA+SW1wbGVt ZW50aW5nIGEgaHVtYW4tZnJpZW5kbHkgZWFzeS10by1maW5kIHdlYiBwYWdl IHdoZXJlIHRoZSBkcmFmdA0KCQl0ZXh0IGNhbiBiZSB1cGxvYWRlZCBhbG9u ZyB3aXRoIG1ldGEgYXR0cmlidXRlcyB3b3VsZCBiZSBvbmUgd2F5IHRvDQoJ CXNhdGlzZnkgdGhpcyByZXF1aXJlbWVudC4gQSBodW1hbi1vcmllbnRlZCBz dGF0dXMgcGFnZSBjYW4gYmUgcmV0dXJuZWQNCgkJdG8gaW5kaWNhdGUgdGhl IHJlc3VsdCBvZiB0aGUgc3VibWlzc2lvbi4gDQo8L3A+DQo8cD5UaGUgInNv ZnR3YXJlIHB1Ymxpc2hlciIgcGFydCBvZiB0aGUgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnQgaW1w bGllcyB0aGF0DQoJCXN1Ym1pc3Npb24gaXMgcHVibGlzaGVkIG9yIHJlamVj dGVkIHdpdGhvdXQgYW55IGh1bWFuIGludm9sdmVtZW50Lg0KPC9wPg0KPGEg bmFtZT0icmZjLnNlY3Rpb24uNS4zIj48L2E+PGg0PjxhIG5hbWU9InNlY3Rp b25fcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzX2gyaF9tb2RlIj41LjM8L2E+Jm5ic3A7SHVtYW4t dG8taHVtYW4NCgltb2RlPC9oND4NCg0KPHA+U3VibWlzc2lvbiBpbnRlcmZh Y2UgTVVTVCBzdXBwb3J0IGRyYWZ0IHN1Ym1pc3Npb24gYnkgYSBodW1hbiB0 byBhDQoJCWh1bWFuLCBwb3NzaWJseSBhcyBhIGxhc3QtcmVzb3J0LCBkaXNj b3VyYWdlZCBvcHRpb24uIEZvciBleGFtcGxlLA0KCQlTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCBt YXkgcHJvdmlkZSBhIGh1bWFuLW1vbml0b3JlZCBlLW1haWwgYWRkcmVzcyB3 aGVyZSBkcmFmdHMNCgkJY2FuIGJlIG1haWxlZCBieXBhc3NpbmcgYXV0b21h dGVkIHB1Ymxpc2hlcnMuDQo8L3A+DQo8cD5Vc2luZyB0aGlzIG1vZGUgbWF5 IHJlc3VsdCBpbiBzaWduaWZpY2FudCBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbiBkZWxheXMuIFRo ZQ0KCQlodW1hbi1hc3Npc3RlZCBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIGFuZCBwdWJsaWNhdGlv biBtZWNoYW5pc20gTUFZIHVzZSBzb21lDQoJCWF1dG9tYXRpb24gKGUuZy4s IGF1dG9tYXRpYyBzcGFtIGRldGVjdGlvbiBmb3IgZS1tYWlsIHN1Ym1pc3Np b25zKS4gSWYNCgkJYXV0b21hdGlvbiBpcyB1c2VkIGJ5IGRlZmF1bHQsIHRo ZSBtZWNoYW5pc20gTVVTVCBwcm92aWRlIGEgd2F5IGZvciBhDQoJCWh1bWFu IHN1Ym1pdHRlciB0byBieXBhc3MgdGhhdCBhdXRvbWF0aW9uIChlLmcuLCBh IGtleXdvcmQgaW4gZS1tYWlsDQoJCXN1YmplY3Qgd2lsbCB0dXJuIHNwYW0g ZmlsdGVyaW5nIG9mZikuDQo8L3A+DQo8cD5UaGUgaW50ZW50IG9mIHRoaXMg bW9kZSBpcyB0byBwcm92aWRlIGEgd2F5IGZvciBzdWJtaXR0ZXJzIHRvDQoJ CWJ5cGFzcyBidWdzIG9yIGxpbWl0YXRpb25zIG9mIGF1dG9tYXRlZCBtZWNo YW5pc21zIGluIG9yZGVyIHRvIHB1Ymxpc2gNCgkJYW4gdW51c3VhbCBkcmFm dCBvciB0byBwdWJsaXNoIGEgZHJhZnQgdW5kZXIgdW51c3VhbA0KCQljaXJj dW1zdGFuY2VzLg0KPC9wPg0KPGEgbmFtZT0icmZjLnNlY3Rpb24uNS40Ij48 L2E+PGg0PjxhIG5hbWU9InNlY3Rpb25fcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzX2RyeV9tb2Rl Ij41LjQ8L2E+Jm5ic3A7RHJ5IFJ1biBtb2RlPC9oND4NCg0KPHA+VEJEOiBK dXN0IHZhbGlkYXRpb24sIG5vIHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uLg0KPC9wPg0KPGEgbmFt ZT0icmZjLnNlY3Rpb24uNS41Ij48L2E+PGg0PjxhIG5hbWU9InNlY3Rpb25f cmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzX21vZGVfbWF0cml4Ij41LjU8L2E+Jm5ic3A7TW9kZSBh dXRvbWF0aW9uDQoJbWF0cml4PC9oND4NCg0KPHA+VGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZyB0 YWJsZSBzdW1tYXJpemVzIGF1dG9tYXRpb24gcnVsZXMgZm9yIHRoZSBtYWpv cg0KCQltb2Rlcy4NCjwvcD48dGFibGUgY2xhc3M9ImRhdGEiIGFsaWduPSJj ZW50ZXIiIGJvcmRlcj0iMSIgY2VsbHBhZGRpbmc9IjIiIGNlbGxzcGFjaW5n PSIyIj4NCjx0cj4NCjx0aCBhbGlnbj0ibGVmdCIgd2lkdGg9IjM0JSI+TW9k ZTwvdGg+DQo8dGggYWxpZ249ImNlbnRlciIgd2lkdGg9IjMzJSI+U3VibWlz c2lvbjwvdGg+DQo8dGggYWxpZ249ImNlbnRlciIgd2lkdGg9IjMzJSI+UHVi bGljYXRpb248L3RoPg0KPC90cj4NCjx0cj4NCjx0ZCBhbGlnbj0ibGVmdCI+ RnVsbCBhdXRvbWF0aW9uPC90ZD4NCjx0ZCBhbGlnbj0iY2VudGVyIj5zb2Z0 d2FyZTwvdGQ+DQo8dGQgYWxpZ249ImNlbnRlciI+c29mdHdhcmU8L3RkPg0K PC90cj4NCjx0cj4NCjx0ZCBhbGlnbj0ibGVmdCI+UHVibGljYXRpb24gYXV0 b21hdGlvbjwvdGQ+DQo8dGQgYWxpZ249ImNlbnRlciI+aHVtYW48L3RkPg0K PHRkIGFsaWduPSJjZW50ZXIiPnNvZnR3YXJlPC90ZD4NCjwvdHI+DQo8dHI+ DQo8dGQgYWxpZ249ImxlZnQiPkh1bWFuIHRvIGh1bWFuPC90ZD4NCjx0ZCBh bGlnbj0iY2VudGVyIj5odW1hbjwvdGQ+DQo8dGQgYWxpZ249ImNlbnRlciI+ aHVtYW48L3RkPg0KPC90cj4NCjwvdGFibGU+DQoNCjxhIG5hbWU9InNlY3Rp b25fcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzX3ZhbGlkYXRvciI+PC9hPjxiciAvPjxociAvPg0K PHRhYmxlIHN1bW1hcnk9ImxheW91dCIgY2VsbHBhZGRpbmc9IjAiIGNlbGxz cGFjaW5nPSIyIiBjbGFzcz0iYnVnIiBhbGlnbj0icmlnaHQiPjx0cj48dGQg Y2xhc3M9ImJ1ZyI+PGEgaHJlZj0iI3RvYyIgY2xhc3M9ImxpbmsyIj4mbmJz cDtUT0MmbmJzcDs8L2E+PC90ZD48L3RyPjwvdGFibGU+DQo8YSBuYW1lPSJy ZmMuc2VjdGlvbi42Ij48L2E+PGgzPjYuJm5ic3A7RHJhZnQgVmFsaWRhdGlv bjwvaDM+DQoNCjxwPklFVEYgc3RhbmRhcmRzIGhhdmUgdG8gZm9sbG93IGEg c2V0IG9mIHN5bnRheCBhbmQgc2VtYW50aWNzDQoJcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzIChY WFg6IHByb3ZpZGUgcmVmZXJlbmNlcyB0byB0aGUgbml0cyBkb2N1bWVudCBh bmQgSVANCglwb2xpY2llcykuIE1vc3Qgb2YgdGhvc2UgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRz IGFyZSBub3QgZW5mb3JjZWQgZm9yIEludGVybmV0DQoJRHJhZnRzLiBIb3dl dmVyLCBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdGhlbSBtYXkgaW1wcm92ZSBkcmFmdCBxdWFsaXR5 LCByZWR1Y2UgSUVTRw0KCWxvYWQsIGFuZCBpbmNyZWFzZSB0aGUgY2hhbmNl cyBvZiB0aGUgZHJhZnQgYmVpbmcgYXBwcm92ZWQgYXMgYW4gUkZDLg0KCURy YWZ0IHN1Ym1pc3Npb24gbWVjaGFuaXNtIE1VU1QgdmFsaWRhdGUgdGhlIGRy YWZ0cy4gSW4gY2FzZSBvZiBhDQoJaHVtYW4tdG8taHVtYW4gaW50ZXJmYWNl LCBzdWNoIHZhbGlkYXRpb24gbWF5IGJlIGluaXRpYXRlZCBieSB0aGUNCglo dW1hbiBwdWJsaXNoZXIuDQo8L3A+DQo8cD5XaGVuIHZhbGlkYXRpbmcgYSBn aXZlbiBkcmFmdCwgaXQgaXMgaW1wb3J0YW50IHRvIGRpc3Rpbmd1aXNoDQoJ YmV0d2VlbiBhYnNvbHV0ZSByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgYW5kIGRlc2lyYWJsZSBk cmFmdCBwcm9wZXJ0aWVzLiBCb3RoIGFyZQ0KCWRldGFpbGVkIGluIHRoZSBm b2xsb3dpbmcgc3Vic2VjdGlvbnMuDQo8L3A+DQo8YSBuYW1lPSJyZmMuc2Vj dGlvbi42LjEiPjwvYT48aDQ+PGEgbmFtZT0ic2VjdGlvbl9yZXF1aXJlbWVu dHNfdmFsaWRhdG9yX2FicyI+Ni4xPC9hPiZuYnNwO0Fic29sdXRlDQoJcmVx dWlyZW1lbnRzPC9oND4NCg0KPHA+QSBkcmFmdCB2YWxpZGF0b3IgTVVTVCBj aGVjayB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIHJlcXVpcmVtZW50cyBhbmQgYSBkcmFmdA0K CQlwdWJsaXNoZXIgTVVTVCBOT1QgcHVibGlzaCBkcmFmdHMgdGhhdCBmYWls ZWQgY29ycmVzcG9uZGluZyB2YWxpZGF0b3INCgkJY2hlY2tzLg0KPC9wPg0K PHA+PC9wPg0KPG9sIGNsYXNzPSJ0ZXh0Ij4NCjxsaT5BIGRyYWZ0IG11c3Qg YmUgc3VibWl0dGVkIGJ5IGl0cyBhdXRob3IsIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRpbmcNCgkJ CXdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgY2hhaXIsIG9yIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRpbmcgYXJlYSBk aXJlY3RvciAoWFhYOiBpcw0KCQkJdGhpcyB0aGUgcmlnaHQgcGxhY2UgdG8g ZXhwbGFpbiB3aHkgd2UgbmVlZCBBRCBvdmVycmlkZSBvcHRpb24NCgkJCXRv IGxldCBJRVNHIHB1Ymxpc2ggZHJhZnQgZml4ZXM/KS4NCjwvbGk+DQo8bGk+ VGhlIGluaXRpYWwgcmV2aXNpb24gb2YgYSBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwIGRyYWZ0 IG11c3QgYmUNCgkJCXN1Ym1pdHRlZCBieSB0aGUgY29ycmVzcG9uZGluZyB3 b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIGNoYWlyLg0KPC9saT4NCjxsaT5DdXJyZW50IGRyYWZ0 IHN0YXRlIG11c3QgYWxsb3cgbmV3IHJldmlzaW9ucyB0byBiZQ0KCQkJcHVi bGlzaGVkLiAoWFhYOiBkb2N1bWVudCBJRVNHIHJldmlldyBzdGF0ZXMgd2hl biBuZXcNCgkJCXJldmlzaW9ucyBhcmUgbm90IGFsbG93ZWQpLg0KPC9saT4N CjxsaT5Db3JyZWN0IGRyYWZ0IG5hbWUgKGluY2x1ZGluZyBjb3JyZWN0IHJl dmlzaW9uIG51bWJlcikgbXVzdA0KCQkJYXBwZWFyIGluIHRoZSBkcmFmdCB0 ZXh0Lg0KPC9saT4NCjxsaT5BbiBJRVRGIElQUiBzdGF0ZW1lbnQgbXVzdCBh cHBlYXIgaW4gdGhlIGRyYWZ0IHRleHQuIChYWFg6DQoJCQlpcyB0aGlzIGFu IGFic29sdXRlIHJlcXVpcmVtZW50IGZvciBhIGRyYWZ0PykNCjwvbGk+DQo8 L29sPg0KDQo8cD4oWFhYOiBEcnkgUnVuIG1vZGUgbWF5IG5vdCBuZWVkIG1h bnkgb2YgdGhlIGFib3ZlIGNoZWNrcywgZGVwZW5kaW5nDQoJCW9uIHVzZXIg bmVlZHMpDQo8L3A+DQo8YSBuYW1lPSJyZmMuc2VjdGlvbi42LjIiPjwvYT48 aDQ+PGEgbmFtZT0ic2VjdGlvbl9yZXF1aXJlbWVudHNfdmFsaWRhdG9yX2Rl c2lyZSI+Ni4yPC9hPiZuYnNwO0Rlc2lyZWFibGUgZmVhdHVyZXM8L2g0Pg0K DQo8cD5BIGRyYWZ0IHZhbGlkYXRvciBTSE9VTEQgY2hlY2sgdGhlIGZvbGxv d2luZyByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMuIEEgZHJhZnQNCgkJcHVibGlzaGVyIE1BWSBw dWJsaXNoIGRyYWZ0cyBmYWlsZWQgY29ycmVzcG9uZGluZyB2YWxpZGF0b3IN CgkJY2hlY2tzLg0KPC9wPg0KPHA+VEJEOiBsaXN0IHRlc3RhYmxlIG5pdHMg aGVyZSBvciByZWZlciB0byB0aGUgbml0cyBkb2N1bWVudC4NCjwvcD4NCjxh IG5hbWU9InJmYy5zZWN0aW9uLjYuMyI+PC9hPjxoND48YSBuYW1lPSJzZWN0 aW9uX3JlcXVpcmVtZW50c192YWxpZGF0b3JfYWkiPjYuMzwvYT4mbmJzcDtE cmFmdCB0ZXh0IGludGVycHJldGF0aW9uPC9oND4NCg0KPHA+QSB2YWxpZGF0 b3IgTUFZIHRyeSB0byBwYXJ0aWFsbHkgaW50ZXJwcmV0IHRoZSBkcmFmdCB0 ZXh0IGluIG9yZGVyDQoJCXRvIGV4dHJhY3QgZW1iZWRkZWQgZGF0YSBzdWNo IGFzIGRyYWZ0IG5hbWUgb3Igc2VjdXJpdHkgc2VjdGlvbi4gV2hlbg0KCQlj b3JyZXNwb25kaW5nIG1ldGFkYXRhIGlzIHN1cHBsaWVkIGJ5IHRoZSBzdWJt aXR0ZXIsIHRoZSB2YWxpZGF0b3IgY2FuDQoJCWNvbXBhcmUgdGhlIGV4dHJh Y3RlZCBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiB3aXRoIHN1cHBsaWVkIG1ldGFkYXRhLiBUaGUg YWJzZW5jZQ0KCQlvZiBpZGVudGlmaWFibGUgZW1iZWRkZWQgaW5mb3JtYXRp b24gbWF5IHRyaWdnZXIgdmFsaWRhdGlvbiBlcnJvcnMgb3INCgkJd2Fybmlu Z3MuDQo8L3A+DQo8cD5FeHRyYWN0aW9uIG9mIGVtYmVkZGVkIGluZm9ybWF0 aW9uIG1heSB3b3JrIHZlcnkgd2VsbCBmb3Igc29tZQ0KCQlkcmFmdCBmb3Jt YXRzIChlLmcuLCB0aG9zZSBwcm9kdWNlZCBieSBhbiB4bWwycmZjIHRvb2wg KFhYWDogIGFkZA0KCQlyZWZlcmVuY2UpKSwgYnV0IGl0IGlzIGltcG9zc2li bGUgdG8gcmVsaWFibHkgaWRlbnRpZnkgdGhlIGZvcm1hdCBvZiBhDQoJCXBs YWluIHRleHQgc3VibWlzc2lvbi4NCjwvcD4NCjxhIG5hbWU9InNlY3Rpb25f cmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzX21ldGFkYXRhIj48L2E+PGJyIC8+PGhyIC8+DQo8dGFi bGUgc3VtbWFyeT0ibGF5b3V0IiBjZWxscGFkZGluZz0iMCIgY2VsbHNwYWNp bmc9IjIiIGNsYXNzPSJidWciIGFsaWduPSJyaWdodCI+PHRyPjx0ZCBjbGFz cz0iYnVnIj48YSBocmVmPSIjdG9jIiBjbGFzcz0ibGluazIiPiZuYnNwO1RP QyZuYnNwOzwvYT48L3RkPjwvdHI+PC90YWJsZT4NCjxhIG5hbWU9InJmYy5z ZWN0aW9uLjciPjwvYT48aDM+Ny4mbmJzcDtTdWJtaXNzaW9uIE1ldGFkYXRh PC9oMz4NCg0KPHA+VEJEOiBkb2N1bWVudCB3aGF0IG1ldGFkYXRhIG11c3Qg YmUgc3VwcGxpZWQ6IGRyYWZ0IG5hbWUgKGluY2x1ZGluZw0KCXJldmlzaW9u IG51bWJlciksIHN1Ym1pdHRlciBjcmVkZW50aWFscywgaXMgdGhpcyB0aGUg bGFzdCByZXZpc2lvbiBvZiB0aGUNCglkcmFmdCAodG8gYmUgc3VibWl0dGVk IGZvciBJRVRGIGxhc3QgY2FsbCBhbmQgSUVTRyByZXZpZXcpLCBmb3JtYXQs DQoJY29udGVudC1lbmNvZGluZywgZXRjLg0KPC9wPg0KPGEgbmFtZT0ic2Vj dGlvbl9zZWN1cml0eSI+PC9hPjxiciAvPjxociAvPg0KPHRhYmxlIHN1bW1h cnk9ImxheW91dCIgY2VsbHBhZGRpbmc9IjAiIGNlbGxzcGFjaW5nPSIyIiBj bGFzcz0iYnVnIiBhbGlnbj0icmlnaHQiPjx0cj48dGQgY2xhc3M9ImJ1ZyI+ PGEgaHJlZj0iI3RvYyIgY2xhc3M9ImxpbmsyIj4mbmJzcDtUT0MmbmJzcDs8 L2E+PC90ZD48L3RyPjwvdGFibGU+DQo8YSBuYW1lPSJyZmMuc2VjdGlvbi44 Ij48L2E+PGgzPjguJm5ic3A7U2VjdXJpdHkgQ29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnM8L2gz Pg0KDQo8cD5Tb21lLiBUQkQ6IFRhbGsgYWJvdXQgd2h5IGF1dGhlbnRpY2F0 aW9uIGFuZCBhbnRpLXNwYW0NCgltZWFzdXJlcyBiZWNvbWUgaW1wb3J0YW50 IG9uY2UgdGhpbmdzIGJlY29tZSBhdXRvbWF0ZWQuDQo8L3A+DQo8YSBuYW1l PSJzZWN0aW9uX2lhbmEiPjwvYT48YnIgLz48aHIgLz4NCjx0YWJsZSBzdW1t YXJ5PSJsYXlvdXQiIGNlbGxwYWRkaW5nPSIwIiBjZWxsc3BhY2luZz0iMiIg Y2xhc3M9ImJ1ZyIgYWxpZ249InJpZ2h0Ij48dHI+PHRkIGNsYXNzPSJidWci PjxhIGhyZWY9IiN0b2MiIGNsYXNzPSJsaW5rMiI+Jm5ic3A7VE9DJm5ic3A7 PC9hPjwvdGQ+PC90cj48L3RhYmxlPg0KPGEgbmFtZT0icmZjLnNlY3Rpb24u OSI+PC9hPjxoMz45LiZuYnNwO0lBTkEgQ29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnM8L2gzPg0K DQo8cD5Ob25lLg0KPC9wPg0KPGEgbmFtZT0ic2VjdGlvbl9jb21wbGlhbmNl Ij48L2E+PGJyIC8+PGhyIC8+DQo8dGFibGUgc3VtbWFyeT0ibGF5b3V0IiBj ZWxscGFkZGluZz0iMCIgY2VsbHNwYWNpbmc9IjIiIGNsYXNzPSJidWciIGFs aWduPSJyaWdodCI+PHRyPjx0ZCBjbGFzcz0iYnVnIj48YSBocmVmPSIjdG9j IiBjbGFzcz0ibGluazIiPiZuYnNwO1RPQyZuYnNwOzwvYT48L3RkPjwvdHI+ PC90YWJsZT4NCjxhIG5hbWU9InJmYy5zZWN0aW9uLjEwIj48L2E+PGgzPjEw LiZuYnNwO0NvbXBsaWFuY2U8L2gzPg0KDQo8cD5UQkQ6IFdoYXQgZG9lcyBp dCBtZWFuIHRvIGJlIGNvbXBsaWFudCB3aXRoICh0byBzYXRpc2Z5KSBvdXIN CglyZXF1aXJlbWVudHM/DQo8L3A+DQo8YSBuYW1lPSJzZWN0aW9uX2Fja3Mi PjwvYT48YnIgLz48aHIgLz4NCjx0YWJsZSBzdW1tYXJ5PSJsYXlvdXQiIGNl bGxwYWRkaW5nPSIwIiBjZWxsc3BhY2luZz0iMiIgY2xhc3M9ImJ1ZyIgYWxp Z249InJpZ2h0Ij48dHI+PHRkIGNsYXNzPSJidWciPjxhIGhyZWY9IiN0b2Mi IGNsYXNzPSJsaW5rMiI+Jm5ic3A7VE9DJm5ic3A7PC9hPjwvdGQ+PC90cj48 L3RhYmxlPg0KPGEgbmFtZT0icmZjLnNlY3Rpb24uQSI+PC9hPjxoMz5BcHBl bmRpeCBBLiZuYnNwO0Fja25vd2xlZGdtZW50czwvaDM+DQoNCjxwPlRCRC4N CjwvcD4NCjxwPlNwZWNpYWwgdGhhbmtzIHRvIE1hcnNoYWxsIFJvc2UgZm9y IGhpcyB4bWwycmZjIHRvb2wuDQo8L3A+DQo8YSBuYW1lPSJzZWN0aW9uX2No YW5nZV9sb2ciPjwvYT48YnIgLz48aHIgLz4NCjx0YWJsZSBzdW1tYXJ5PSJs YXlvdXQiIGNlbGxwYWRkaW5nPSIwIiBjZWxsc3BhY2luZz0iMiIgY2xhc3M9 ImJ1ZyIgYWxpZ249InJpZ2h0Ij48dHI+PHRkIGNsYXNzPSJidWciPjxhIGhy ZWY9IiN0b2MiIGNsYXNzPSJsaW5rMiI+Jm5ic3A7VE9DJm5ic3A7PC9hPjwv dGQ+PC90cj48L3RhYmxlPg0KPGEgbmFtZT0icmZjLnNlY3Rpb24uQiI+PC9h PjxoMz5BcHBlbmRpeCBCLiZuYnNwO0NoYW5nZSBMb2c8L2gzPg0KDQo8cD5S RkMgRWRpdG9yIE5vdGU6IFRoaXMgc2VjdGlvbiBpcyB0byBiZSByZW1vdmVk IGR1cmluZyB0aGUgZmluYWwNCglwdWJsaWNhdGlvbiBvZiB0aGUgZG9jdW1l bnQuDQo8L3A+DQo8cD5JbnRlcm5hbCBXRyByZXZpc2lvbiBjb250cm9sIElE OiAkSWQ6IGlkLnhtbCx2IDEuNCAyMDA0LzA4LzI1IDE3OjIxOjQzIHJvdXNz a292IEV4cCAkDQo8L3A+DQo8cD48L3A+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBjbGFzcz0i dGV4dCI+PGRsPg0KPGR0PjIwMDQvMDgvMjU8L2R0Pg0KPGRkPg0KPHVsIGNs YXNzPSJ0ZXh0Ij4NCjxsaT5Jbml0aWFsIHJldmlzaW9uLg0KPC9saT4NCjwv dWw+DQo8L2RkPg0KPC9kbD48L2Jsb2NrcXVvdGU+DQoNCjxhIG5hbWU9InJm Yy5yZWZlcmVuY2VzMSI+PC9hPjxiciAvPjxociAvPg0KPHRhYmxlIHN1bW1h cnk9ImxheW91dCIgY2VsbHBhZGRpbmc9IjAiIGNlbGxzcGFjaW5nPSIyIiBj bGFzcz0iYnVnIiBhbGlnbj0icmlnaHQiPjx0cj48dGQgY2xhc3M9ImJ1ZyI+ PGEgaHJlZj0iI3RvYyIgY2xhc3M9ImxpbmsyIj4mbmJzcDtUT0MmbmJzcDs8 L2E+PC90ZD48L3RyPjwvdGFibGU+DQo8aDM+MTEmbmJzcDtOb3JtYXRpdmUg UmVmZXJlbmNlczwvaDM+DQo8dGFibGUgd2lkdGg9Ijk5JSIgYm9yZGVyPSIw Ij4NCjx0cj48dGQgY2xhc3M9ImF1dGhvci10ZXh0IiB2YWxpZ249InRvcCI+ PGEgbmFtZT0iUkZDMjExOSI+W1JGQzIxMTldPC9hPjwvdGQ+DQo8dGQgY2xh c3M9ImF1dGhvci10ZXh0Ij48YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86c29iQGhhcnZhcmQu ZWR1Ij5CcmFkbmVyLCBTLjwvYT4sICI8YSBocmVmPSJmdHA6Ly9mdHAuaXNp LmVkdS9pbi1ub3Rlcy9yZmMyMTE5LnR4dCI+S2V5IHdvcmRzIGZvciB1c2Ug aW4gUkZDcyB0byBJbmRpY2F0ZSBSZXF1aXJlbWVudCBMZXZlbHM8L2E+Iiwg QkNQIDE0LCBSRkMgMjExOSwgTWFyY2ggMTk5NyAoPGEgaHJlZj0iZnRwOi8v ZnRwLmlzaS5lZHUvaW4tbm90ZXMvcmZjMjExOS50eHQiPlRYVDwvYT4sIDxh IGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly94bWwucmVzb3VyY2Uub3JnL3B1YmxpYy9yZmMvaHRt bC9yZmMyMTE5Lmh0bWwiPkhUTUw8L2E+LCA8YSBocmVmPSJodHRwOi8veG1s LnJlc291cmNlLm9yZy9wdWJsaWMvcmZjL3htbC9yZmMyMTE5LnhtbCI+WE1M PC9hPikuPC90ZD48L3RyPg0KPC90YWJsZT4NCg0KPGEgbmFtZT0icmZjLmF1 dGhvcnMiPjwvYT48YnIgLz48aHIgLz4NCjx0YWJsZSBzdW1tYXJ5PSJsYXlv dXQiIGNlbGxwYWRkaW5nPSIwIiBjZWxsc3BhY2luZz0iMiIgY2xhc3M9ImJ1 ZyIgYWxpZ249InJpZ2h0Ij48dHI+PHRkIGNsYXNzPSJidWciPjxhIGhyZWY9 IiN0b2MiIGNsYXNzPSJsaW5rMiI+Jm5ic3A7VE9DJm5ic3A7PC9hPjwvdGQ+ PC90cj48L3RhYmxlPg0KPGgzPkF1dGhvcidzIEFkZHJlc3M8L2gzPg0KPHRh YmxlIHdpZHRoPSI5OSUiIGJvcmRlcj0iMCIgY2VsbHBhZGRpbmc9IjAiIGNl bGxzcGFjaW5nPSIwIj4NCjx0cj48dGQgY2xhc3M9ImF1dGhvci10ZXh0Ij4m bmJzcDs8L3RkPg0KPHRkIGNsYXNzPSJhdXRob3ItdGV4dCI+QWxleCBSb3Vz c2tvdjwvdGQ+PC90cj4NCjx0cj48dGQgY2xhc3M9ImF1dGhvci10ZXh0Ij4m bmJzcDs8L3RkPg0KPHRkIGNsYXNzPSJhdXRob3ItdGV4dCI+VGhlIE1lYXN1 cmVtZW50IEZhY3Rvcnk8L3RkPjwvdHI+DQo8dHI+PHRkIGNsYXNzPSJhdXRo b3IiIGFsaWduPSJyaWdodCI+RU1haWw6Jm5ic3A7PC90ZD4NCjx0ZCBjbGFz cz0iYXV0aG9yLXRleHQiPjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpyb3Vzc2tvdkBtZWFz dXJlbWVudC1mYWN0b3J5LmNvbSI+cm91c3Nrb3ZAbWVhc3VyZW1lbnQtZmFj dG9yeS5jb208L2E+PC90ZD48L3RyPg0KPHRyPjx0ZCBjbGFzcz0iYXV0aG9y IiBhbGlnbj0icmlnaHQiPlVSSTombmJzcDs8L3RkPg0KPHRkIGNsYXNzPSJh dXRob3ItdGV4dCI+PGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5tZWFzdXJlbWVudC1m YWN0b3J5LmNvbS8iPmh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWVhc3VyZW1lbnQtZmFjdG9yeS5j b20vPC9hPjwvdGQ+PC90cj4NCjwvdGFibGU+DQo8YSBuYW1lPSJyZmMuY29w eXJpZ2h0Ij48L2E+PGJyIC8+PGhyIC8+DQo8dGFibGUgc3VtbWFyeT0ibGF5 b3V0IiBjZWxscGFkZGluZz0iMCIgY2VsbHNwYWNpbmc9IjIiIGNsYXNzPSJi dWciIGFsaWduPSJyaWdodCI+PHRyPjx0ZCBjbGFzcz0iYnVnIj48YSBocmVm PSIjdG9jIiBjbGFzcz0ibGluazIiPiZuYnNwO1RPQyZuYnNwOzwvYT48L3Rk PjwvdHI+PC90YWJsZT4NCjxoMz5JbnRlbGxlY3R1YWwgUHJvcGVydHkgU3Rh dGVtZW50PC9oMz4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSdjb3B5cmlnaHQnPg0KVGhlIElFVEYg dGFrZXMgbm8gcG9zaXRpb24gcmVnYXJkaW5nIHRoZSB2YWxpZGl0eSBvciBz Y29wZSBvZiBhbnkNCkludGVsbGVjdHVhbCBQcm9wZXJ0eSBSaWdodHMgb3Ig b3RoZXIgcmlnaHRzIHRoYXQgbWlnaHQgYmUgY2xhaW1lZA0KdG8gcGVydGFp biB0byB0aGUgaW1wbGVtZW50YXRpb24gb3IgdXNlIG9mIHRoZSB0ZWNobm9s b2d5IA0KZGVzY3JpYmVkIGluIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgb3IgdGhlIGV4dGVu dCB0byB3aGljaCBhbnkgbGljZW5zZSANCnVuZGVyIHN1Y2ggcmlnaHRzIG1p Z2h0IG9yIG1pZ2h0IG5vdCBiZSBhdmFpbGFibGU7IG5vciBkb2VzIGl0DQpy ZXByZXNlbnQgdGhhdCBpdCBoYXMgbWFkZSBhbnkgaW5kZXBlbmRlbnQgZWZm b3J0IHRvIGlkZW50aWZ5IGFueQ0Kc3VjaCByaWdodHMuDQpJbmZvcm1hdGlv biBvbiB0aGUgcHJvY2VkdXJlcyB3aXRoIHJlc3BlY3QgdG8NCnJpZ2h0cyBp biBSRkMgZG9jdW1lbnRzIGNhbiBiZSBmb3VuZCBpbiBCQ1AgNzggYW5kIEJD UCA3OS48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0nY29weXJpZ2h0Jz4NCkNvcGllcyBvZiBJ UFIgZGlzY2xvc3VyZXMgbWFkZSB0byB0aGUgSUVURiBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdCBh bmQgYW55DQphc3N1cmFuY2VzIG9mIGxpY2Vuc2VzIHRvIGJlIG1hZGUgYXZh aWxhYmxlLA0Kb3IgdGhlIHJlc3VsdCBvZiBhbiBhdHRlbXB0IG1hZGUgdG8g b2J0YWluIGEgZ2VuZXJhbCBsaWNlbnNlIG9yDQpwZXJtaXNzaW9uIGZvciB0 aGUgdXNlIG9mIHN1Y2ggcHJvcHJpZXRhcnkgcmlnaHRzIGJ5IGltcGxlbWVu dGVycyBvcg0KdXNlcnMgb2YgdGhpcyBzcGVjaWZpY2F0aW9uIGNhbiBiZSBv YnRhaW5lZCBmcm9tIHRoZSBJRVRGIG9uLWxpbmUgSVBSDQpyZXBvc2l0b3J5 IGF0IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaXByLjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSdj b3B5cmlnaHQnPg0KVGhlIElFVEYgaW52aXRlcyBhbnkgaW50ZXJlc3RlZCBw YXJ0eSB0byBicmluZyB0byBpdHMgYXR0ZW50aW9uDQphbnkgY29weXJpZ2h0 cywNCnBhdGVudHMgb3IgcGF0ZW50IGFwcGxpY2F0aW9ucywNCm9yIG90aGVy DQpwcm9wcmlldGFyeSByaWdodHMgdGhhdCBtYXkgY292ZXIgdGVjaG5vbG9n eSB0aGF0IG1heSBiZSByZXF1aXJlZA0KdG8gaW1wbGVtZW50IHRoaXMgc3Rh bmRhcmQuDQpQbGVhc2UgYWRkcmVzcyB0aGUgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gdG8gdGhl IElFVEYgYXQgaWV0Zi1pcHJAaWV0Zi5vcmcuPC9wPg0KPGgzPkRpc2NsYWlt ZXIgb2YgVmFsaWRpdHk8L2gzPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9J2NvcHlyaWdodCc+DQpU aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGFuZCB0aGUgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gY29udGFpbmVkIGhl cmVpbiBhcmUgcHJvdmlkZWQNCm9uIGFuICZxdW90O0FTIElTJnF1b3Q7IGJh c2lzIGFuZCBUSEUgQ09OVFJJQlVUT1IsDQpUSEUgT1JHQU5JWkFUSU9OIEhF L1NIRSBSRVBSRVNFTlRTIE9SIElTIFNQT05TT1JFRCBCWSAoSUYgQU5ZKSwN ClRIRSBJTlRFUk5FVCBTT0NJRVRZIEFORCBUSEUgSU5URVJORVQgRU5HSU5F RVJJTkcgVEFTSyBGT1JDRSBESVNDTEFJTQ0KQUxMIFdBUlJBTlRJRVMsIA0K RVhQUkVTUyBPUiBJTVBMSUVELA0KSU5DTFVESU5HIEJVVCBOT1QgTElNSVRF RCBUTyBBTlkgV0FSUkFOVFkgVEhBVCBUSEUgVVNFIE9GIFRIRQ0KSU5GT1JN QVRJT04gSEVSRUlOIFdJTEwgTk9UIElORlJJTkdFIEFOWSBSSUdIVFMgT1Ig QU5ZIElNUExJRUQNCldBUlJBTlRJRVMgT0YgTUVSQ0hBTlRBQklMSVRZIE9S IEZJVE5FU1MgRk9SIEEgUEFSVElDVUxBUiBQVVJQT1NFLjwvcD4NCjxoMz5D b3B5cmlnaHQgU3RhdGVtZW50PC9oMz4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSdjb3B5cmlnaHQn Pg0KQ29weXJpZ2h0IChDKSBUaGUgSW50ZXJuZXQgU29jaWV0eSAoMjAwNCku DQpUaGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGlzIHN1YmplY3QgdG8gdGhlIHJpZ2h0cywNCmxp Y2Vuc2VzIGFuZCByZXN0cmljdGlvbnMgY29udGFpbmVkIGluIEJDUCA3OCwN CmFuZCBleGNlcHQgYXMgc2V0IGZvcnRoIHRoZXJlaW4sDQp0aGUgYXV0aG9y cyByZXRhaW4gYWxsIHRoZWlyIHJpZ2h0cy48L3A+DQo8aDM+QWNrbm93bGVk Z21lbnQ8L2gzPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9J2NvcHlyaWdodCc+DQpGdW5kaW5nIGZv ciB0aGUgUkZDIEVkaXRvciBmdW5jdGlvbiBpcyBjdXJyZW50bHkgcHJvdmlk ZWQgYnkgdGhlDQpJbnRlcm5ldCBTb2NpZXR5LjwvcD4NCjwvYm9keT48L2h0 bWw+DQo= --0-1716868460-1093454848=:49770 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team --0-1716868460-1093454848=:49770-- From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 25 15:15:19 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA10789; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:15:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C03Fg-0008DW-Qh; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:16:09 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C02vG-000076-4l; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:55:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C02gD-0006Aq-L5 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:39:29 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA08145 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:39:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from basie.internet2.edu ([207.75.164.22]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C02gs-0007bJ-51 for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:40:13 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 765A01CD565 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:39:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from basie.internet2.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (basie.internet2.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 03032-03 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:39:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3F61CD4F4 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:39:18 -0400 (EDT) To: tools-team@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Minutes from 25 Aug 2004 Telechat References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> From: stanislav shalunov Date: 25 Aug 2004 14:39:25 -0400 In-Reply-To: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> Message-ID: <86u0ur83ky.fsf@abel.internet2.edu> Lines: 8 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: by mail.internet2.edu virus scanner X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad The recording of today's call is at http://netflow.internet2.edu/tools/20040825-tools.wav -- Stanislav Shalunov http://www.internet2.edu/~shalunov/ "Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes." -- E. W. Dijkstra _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 25 19:43:46 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA07697; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:43:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C07RW-0007VL-IT; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:44:39 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C07Ei-0007y7-Se; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:31:24 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C073M-0004x0-LO for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:19:40 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA06358 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:19:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0745-00077A-C5 for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:20:26 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7PNJW9d071488 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:19:32 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7PNJWQ3071487; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:19:32 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:19:32 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: tools-team@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> Message-ID: <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 31247fb3be228bb596db9127becad0bc Subject: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 10d3e4e3c32e363f129e380e644649be > * Alex will re-initiate the discussion on the > tools-team@ietf.org list, as a continuation of the > discussion about needed tools, components, requirements > etc which was started before IETF-60, but temporarily > put on hold. I suggest that we spend a few cycles discussing an "IETF tools framework" that will mention key IETF tools and focus on tools relationships and common components rather than individual tool requirements. Depending on the initial result, we can decide to document the framework somewhere or abandon the idea. Here are a few major framework areas that I can identify: 1. Document Repository: includes meta-information and actual texts for drafts, RFCs, errata, WG charters, agendas, minutes, etc. I am not sure whether WG mailing list archives and issue lists belong here, but I suspect they do. 2. People Repository: information about IETF participants, initially populated with information about IESG, Chairs, and Authors to facilitate IETF-wide authentication. Should this be an Actor or Entity Repository instead to include information about WGs, teams, IESG, IAB, etc? 3. Event Queue: document publication, standard approval, errata updates and similar events. This area is essential for implementing "monitor this WG/draft/etc" or "let me know of any last calls" services. Some events might not be "stored" anywhere, but may trigger updates of document and people repositories, among other things. If the above makes sense, we can then describe major tool interaction and major shared components in terms of their effects on the above areas. For example, we can say that ID submission tool uses People Repository to authenticate the submitter of the draft, places the new revision into the Document Repository, and generates events such as "draft updated" or "new WG draft available". These events may reach interested parties, including, for example, authors of documents that refer to the updated draft. Furthermore, given the above framework, corresponding shared tools/interfaces come into picture: 1. Document Repository Manager: accepts new documents and meta-information, maintains links among documents, deletes documents, etc. 2. People Repository Manager: same as Document Repository Manager but for information about IETF participants. This manager can perform authentication among other things. 3. Event Dispatcher: queues "let me know when..." requests, accepts new events, archives them(?), and forwards them to those who wanted to be informed of them. While a comprehensive framework (the above is just an incomplete and buggy sketch) would both make building tools easier and give IETFers a coherent "IETF interface", I do not know whether IETF Secretariat would be willing to move from a collection of isolated tools to a "system". It is certainly easier to build any given isolated tool than to build the framework and the tool. Savings and benefits from a coherent framework can only be long-term... One the other hand, several items on Secretariat TODO list and Harald comments during one of the conference calls may indicate desire to move away from individual tools to a more organized approach. We certainly do not have to wait for a complete framework to start implementing key tools; the question is one of the direction and willingness to spend "enough" cycles on long-term goals while doing individual tool development/adoption. I would be interested in hearing comments from TOOLs members _and_ Secretariat/IESG folks. Do we want to move in the coherent framework direction? Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 26 10:30:23 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA04143; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:30:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0LHd-0005AG-JW; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:31:24 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0L5i-000157-9l; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:19:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0Kij-0000Kq-F1 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:55:17 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA14773 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 04:06:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0FIU-00075W-8t for tools-team@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 04:07:53 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73EF661BDB; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:34:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 18361-05; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:34:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from halvestr-w2k02.emea.cisco.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id E657861B9F; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:34:26 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:34:26 +0200 From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand To: Alex Rousskov , tools-team@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? Message-ID: <4BDDD96BCC40DC0CE84A8622@[192.168.1.225]> In-Reply-To: <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.5 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 69a74e02bbee44ab4f8eafdbcedd94a1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit using different terminology.... playing.... documents: stuff that is worked on (charters, I-Ds (my abstract concept of I-D is without version), RFCs, Web pages, IANA databases....) actors: people who do things to documents. some actors are roles filled by multiple people. tasks: stuff that actors are supposed to do to documents. completing a task may generate a new document, a new task, both, or neither. so may working on a task without completing it.... a document can be referred to by multiple tasks simultaneously. a task can refer to multiple documents. events: the result of an actor doing a task to a document (not necessarily completing it). may leave information behind that should not be considered a document in its own right. we need document repositories (to know what the current document set is), actor databases (knowing who can do which tasks, and which people fill roles), task databases (figuring out who's supposed to do what next to what), and event logs (saying what happened). I think most of what we currently have fits within such a model - but we do things differently in different corners, for historical or practical reasons. ie WG charter change is not tracked in I-D tracker, IANA database updates are tracked in an IANA spreadsheet, RFC Editor history log is the archives of the ietf-announce list..... sense? _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 26 11:24:19 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA10824; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:24:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0M7r-00074L-OO; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:25:21 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0LeG-0003Ai-4o; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:54:44 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0LTo-0007kT-9q for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:43:56 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA13760 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 03:50:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0F2N-0006cg-0j for tools-team@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 03:51:12 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87DE261BB0; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:25:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 18049-08; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:25:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from halvestr-w2k02.emea.cisco.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3387E61B9F; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:25:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:25:11 +0200 From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand To: Alex Rousskov , tools-team@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Requirements for IETF Draft Submission Interface, v1.4 Message-ID: <2CEF21323D9C0820E87C9E8C@[192.168.1.225]> In-Reply-To: <20040825110109.K49770@measurement-factory.com> References: <20040825110109.K49770@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.5 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 918f4bd8440e8de4700bcf6d658bc801 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: dd887a8966a4c4c217a52303814d0b5f Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit some comments in draft..... --On 25. august 2004 11:27 -0600 Alex Rousskov wrote: > > > TOOLS team A. Rousskov > Internet-Draft The Measurement Factory > Expires: February 23, 2005 August 25, 2004 > > > Requirements for IETF Draft Submission Interface > > 1. Introduction > > Published Internet Drafts are primary means of structured > communication within IETF. Current Internet-Draft (ID) submission nit: please use I-D consistently... > and publication mechanisms hinder efficient and timely communication > while creating unnecessary load on the IETF Secretariat. IETF TOOLs > team recommends formalization and automation of the current > mechanisms. This document contains specific automation requirements. > > 2. Tool Status Quo > > To get an Internet Draft published, an IETF participant e-mails draft > text to the IETF Secretariat, along with an informal note asking to > publish the draft. Secretariat staff reads the note, reviews, and should be "reviews according to a checklist". > then approves or rejects the submission. An approved draft is > automatically (XXX: or manually?) copied to IETF web site, with the automatically. (it's every 4 hours, which sometimes creates issues with pointers being found too early...) > corresponding announcement sent to appropriate IETF mailing list(s). > > Collectively, IETF participants submit thousands (XXX: is there a > more accurate number?) of Internet Drafts per year (XXX: provide > individual and WG submission numbers separately). The vast majority > of submitted drafts are approved for publication (XXX: are stats > available?). It usually takes the Secretariat 12-24 hours (XXX: are > stats available?) to review the draft. Due to much higher demand > and fixed processing capacity, reviews around IETF face-to-face > meetings take much longer, creating a long queue of unprocessed > drafts that are then announced nearly simultaneously. > > To reduce Secretariat load (XXX: are there other reasons?), drafts > submitted close to IETF meetings are ignored. Main reason is to give the participants time to review. In particular, the earlier deadline for -00 drafts is to give participants significant time to review NEW work being proposed. > Anybody and anything can submit a draft for publication. There is no > reliable authentication mechanism. Initial submissions of WG drafts > require WG Chair approval, which is as easy to fake as the submission > request itself. > > Lack of authentication is not perceived as a serious problem, > possibly because serious falsifications are likely to be noticed > before serious damage can be done. Due to informal and manual nature > of the submission mechanism, a massive automated abuse of the > interface is unlikely to cause anything but a short denial of draft > publication service and, hence, is probably not worth defending > against. However, future automation may result in a different trade > off. two more things: - it's never happened that someone submits with evil intent in someone else's name. - sometimes, the submitter is not the person listed as author (for example jsut after a change in editor, or a co-author submitting). this argues for keeping the submission controls flexibile. > > 3. Scope > > TBD: In scope are interface(s) to submit the draft and requirements > on submitted draft review, approval/rejection, and publication. Out > of scope are things like linking related drafts, draft persistency/ > archiving, providing a "monitor this draft" service, and specifics of > authenticating draft submissions. note - a number of information items are manually extraced from the draft today and put into databases. Automation of this function needs to be in scope; other uses of this info is out of this draft's scope (but in tools team scope). > > 4. Terminology > > The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", > "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this > document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. When used > with the normative meanings, these keywords will be all uppercase. > Occurrences of these words in lowercase comprise normal prose usage, > with no normative implications. > > Submitter: A human or software submitting an Internet Draft for > publication. A human submitter is likely to use some automation > tools (e.g., an e-mail client), but differs from the software > submitter in that it is a human who explicitly initiates the > submission process and interprets submission results. > > Publisher: A human or software validating and publishing a submitted > Internet Draft. A human publisher is likely to use some > automation tools (e.g., a validation tool), but differs from the > software publisher in that it is a human who explicitly initiates > the validation/publication process and interprets its results. > > > 5. Modes > > Tool requirements depend on the submission and publication mode. ID > submission tool MUST support all three modes documented in this > section. Supporting different modes may call for creation of > different tools. (XXX: are all modes in scope?) (XXX: is there a > better term than mode?) > > (XXX: need to do a much better job at showing what requirements apply > to what tools or tool parts; we are lacking good terminology here). > > 5.1 Full automation mode > > Submission interface SHOULD support draft submissions by software > submitter to software publisher. For example, it should be possible > to configure decent content management software to automatically > submit and instantly publish the draft whenever a new revision of the > draft text is checked in. > > Implementing a CGI interface for POSTing draft text and meta > attributes to a well-known IETF URL would be one way to accommodate a > software submitter (XXX: add WebDAV as another example?). The > software-friendly outcome of the submission can then be expressed via > HTTP status codes (e.g., any code other than 200 or 201 would > indicate a failure). > > The "software publisher" part of the requirement implies that > submitted draft is published or rejected without any human > involvement. Reject/rename. There has to be human-in-the-loop on the submitter side, IMHO. Remember that the submission of a draft includes the submitter making an IPR disclosure commitment and copyright transfer. Making software do this without making it clear to the human it's happening is Evil. However, putting the "submit" button in the submitter's software rather than the publisher's software is Goodness. > 5.2 Publication automation mode > > Submission interface MUST support draft submission by a human > submitter to software publisher. For example, it should be possible > for the draft author to submit and instantly publish the draft > whenever the author feels that the new revision of the draft should > be published. s/instantly/quickly/. "Instantly" does not exist. > > Implementing a human-friendly easy-to-find web page where the draft > text can be uploaded along with meta attributes would be one way to > satisfy this requirement. A human-oriented status page can be > returned to indicate the result of the submission. > > The "software publisher" part of the requirement implies that > submission is published or rejected without any human involvement. > > 5.3 Human-to-human mode > > Submission interface MUST support draft submission by a human to a > human, possibly as a last-resort, discouraged option. For example, > Secretariat may provide a human-monitored e-mail address where drafts > can be mailed bypassing automated publishers. > > Using this mode may result in significant publication delays. The > human-assisted submission and publication mechanism MAY use some > automation (e.g., automatic spam detection for e-mail submissions). > If automation is used by default, the mechanism MUST provide a way > for a human submitter to bypass that automation (e.g., a keyword in > e-mail subject will turn spam filtering off). > > The intent of this mode is to provide a way for submitters to bypass > bugs or limitations of automated mechanisms in order to publish an > unusual draft or to publish a draft under unusual circumstances. > > 5.4 Dry Run mode > > TBD: Just validation, no publication. One modality comment.... some information, like name and version number, goes into the draft, but can only be reliably produced by the publishing system. A "reserve this name/number" function is a Good Thing. > > 5.5 Mode automation matrix > > The following table summarizes automation rules for the major modes. > > +------------------------+------------+-------------+ > | Mode | Submission | Publication | > +------------------------+------------+-------------+ > | Full automation | software | software | > | Publication automation | human | software | > | Human to human | human | human | > +------------------------+------------+-------------+ > > > 6. Draft Validation > > IETF standards have to follow a set of syntax and semantics > requirements (XXX: provide references to the nits document and IP > policies). Most of those requirements are not enforced for Internet > Drafts. However, following them may improve draft quality, reduce > IESG load, and increase the chances of the draft being approved as an > RFC. Draft submission mechanism MUST validate the drafts. In case > of a human-to-human interface, such validation may be initiated by > the human publisher. > > When validating a given draft, it is important to distinguish between > absolute requirements and desirable draft properties. Both are > detailed in the following subsections. > > 6.1 Absolute requirements > > A draft validator MUST check the following requirements and a draft > publisher MUST NOT publish drafts that failed corresponding validator > checks. > > 1. A draft must be submitted by its author, corresponding working > group chair, or corresponding area director (XXX: is this the > right place to explain why we need AD override option to let IESG > publish draft fixes?). Yes. And don't forget the co-author, changed editor, and drafts being published anonymously (secretariat needs to know who submitter is, but name doesn't necessarily appear on draft). > > 2. The initial revision of a Working Group draft must be submitted > by the corresponding working group chair. Today: approved, not submitted. > > 3. Current draft state must allow new revisions to be published. > (XXX: document IESG review states when new revisions are not > allowed). none such - "should not" and "must be notified" is the watchword. Too many fixes needed.... > > 4. Correct draft name (including correct revision number) must > appear in the draft text. > > 5. An IETF IPR statement must appear in the draft text. (XXX: is > this an absolute requirement for a draft?) Yes. > > (XXX: Dry Run mode may not need many of the above checks, depending > on user needs) IMHO: Dry Run mode should give every error message in the book... but not cause a draft to be published. > > 6.2 Desireable features > > A draft validator SHOULD check the following requirements. A draft > publisher MAY publish drafts failed corresponding validator checks. > > TBD: list testable nits here or refer to the nits document. > > 6.3 Draft text interpretation > > A validator MAY try to partially interpret the draft text in order to > extract embedded data such as draft name or security section. When > corresponding metadata is supplied by the submitter, the validator > can compare the extracted information with supplied metadata. The > absence of identifiable embedded information may trigger validation > errors or warnings. > > Extraction of embedded information may work very well for some draft > formats (e.g., those produced by an xml2rfc tool (XXX: add > reference)), but it is impossible to reliably identify the format of > a plain text submission. make note that we want to allow publishing xml drafts.... > > 7. Submission Metadata > > TBD: document what metadata must be supplied: draft name (including > revision number), submitter credentials, is this the last revision of > the draft (to be submitted for IETF last call and IESG review), > format, content-encoding, etc. > keep the "last revision" out of it - generally, one does not know; classic cycle is submission1, WG last call, submission2, AD review, submission3, IETF last call, submission4, IESG review, submission5, IESG approval, publication - but ANY of the submissions 2-5 may turn out not to be needed, or be multiple cycle. that's all, folks... .better quick comments now than deep comments never.... _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 27 09:03:27 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA26808; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:03:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0gPH-0000kW-SL; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:04:40 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0gCZ-0000ab-9n; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 08:51:31 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0g8g-00085N-HW for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 08:47:30 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA26099 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 08:47:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av3-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.114]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0g9l-0000UV-VI for tools-team@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 08:48:41 -0400 Received: by av3-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 3A68637EED; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:46:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.183]) by av3-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 288C437E4A; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:46:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFB6A37E53; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:46:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C0g84-0007zu-8Q; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:46:52 +0200 Message-ID: <412F2D3C.2040904@levkowetz.com> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:46:52 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Requirements for IETF Draft Submission Interface, v1.4 References: <20040825110109.K49770@measurement-factory.com> In-Reply-To: <20040825110109.K49770@measurement-factory.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 22f8e36c8d8be0bcbb9bf02fb6ce7335 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 19c92f723dac1bcdd68591cc46e38e95 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alex, Here's some feedback on the draft: Alex Rousskov wrote: > > Hi, > > My initial take at the ID submission requirements draft is attached > as plain text and HTML files. > > I do not like the current organization of the draft, but I would > like to hear your high-level comments before polishing it. Specifically, > > - Should we be talking about different modes of > draft submission? The draft itentifies 3.5 modes (see > Section 5). We can simplify a lot if we focus on one mode > only, but I think that all currently documented modes > except for "Full Automation" are essential for > a good draft submission environment. And "Full Automation" > is the direction we should be moving in long-term. Agree fully except for the last sentence. > - I am having trouble coming up with good terminology > to name the subject of our requirements. Especially > with multiple modes, we are not talking aboutra > single ID submission tool or interface. We are talking about > several tools, and each tool has at least two > sides/interfaces: submitter and publisher. Is there > a better terminology than "ID submission tool"? I-D submission toolset? > - What do we do if ideal draft submission environment > conflicts with current IETF rules. For example, if > the tool allows for instant publication, some drafts > may have more than 99 published versions and refering > to a draft by its name and version should be exception > rather than the rule (just the name should be used in > most cases). Can we suggest such changes to the IETF? > > - Should I delete the "Status Quo" section? (Section 2) No, I think it's good to have that there. > Thanks, > > Alex. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > TOOLS team A. Rousskov > Internet-Draft The Measurement Factory > Expires: February 23, 2005 August 25, 2004 > > > Requirements for IETF Draft Submission Interface > draft-ietf-tools-draft-submission > ... > > 1. Introduction > > Published Internet Drafts are primary means of structured > communication within IETF. Current Internet-Draft (ID) submission > and publication mechanisms hinder efficient and timely communication > while creating unnecessary load on the IETF Secretariat. IETF TOOLs > team recommends My impression is that one of the most eager proponents of an automation is the secretariat itself. They proposed it before us, so we might as well say that, too... > formalization and automation of the current > mechanisms. This document contains specific automation requirements. > > 2. Tool Status Quo > > To get an Internet Draft published, an IETF participant e-mails draft > text to the IETF Secretariat, along with an informal note asking to > publish the draft. Secretariat staff reads the note, reviews, and > then approves or rejects the submission. An approved draft is > automatically (XXX: or manually?) copied to IETF web site, with the > corresponding announcement sent to appropriate IETF mailing list(s). s/IETF web site/IETF drafts repository/ > Collectively, IETF participants submit thousands (XXX: is there a > more accurate number?) of Internet Drafts per year My archives show these totals for recent years. These numbers are somewhat elevated, as the final revision that indicates a draft has been published as RFC has been included in the count. Total: 3416 2000 4622 2001 5196 2002 5362 2003 6827 2004 draft-ietf-*: 1588 2000 2220 2001 2525 2002 2754 2003 1983 2004 others: 1828 2000 2402 2001 2671 2002 2608 2003 4844 2004 (XXX: provide > individual and WG submission numbers separately). The vast majority > of submitted drafts are approved for publication (XXX: are stats > available?). It usually takes the Secretariat 12-24 hours (XXX: are > stats available?) to review the draft. Due to much higher demand > and fixed processing capacity, reviews around IETF face-to-face s/reviews around/reviews during the last weeks before/ > meetings take much longer, creating a long queue of unprocessed > drafts that are then announced nearly simultaneously. > > To reduce Secretariat load (XXX: are there other reasons?), drafts > submitted close to IETF meetings are ignored. To give time to read the documents before the meetings... > Informal interface for submitting and publishing drafts discourages > automation. Lack of automation discourages frequent updates. > Infrequent updates lead to stale published information. > > During periods of high Working Group activity, the delays associated > with draft publication times make official interface especially > inappropriate. Working Groups come up with ad hoc solutions. For > example, many draft subversions are "temporary" published on personal > web sites or posted (completely or in part) to the group list. > Often, alternative means of publication effectively replace official > IETF interfaces and only a few major draft revisions end up being > published on IETF web site. > > Anybody and anything can submit a draft for publication. There is no > reliable authentication mechanism. Initial submissions of WG drafts > require WG Chair approval, which is as easy to fake as the submission > request itself. > > > > Rousskov Expires February 23, 2005 [Page 3] > > Internet-Draft Draft Submission Interface Requirements August 2004 > > > Lack of authentication is not perceived as a serious problem, > possibly because serious falsifications are likely to be noticed > before serious damage can be done. Due to informal and manual nature > of the submission mechanism, a massive automated abuse of the > interface is unlikely to cause anything but a short denial of draft > publication service and, hence, is probably not worth defending > against. However, future automation may result in a different trade > off. > > 3. Scope > > TBD: In scope are interface(s) to submit the draft and requirements > on submitted draft review, approval/rejection, and publication. Out > of scope are things like linking related drafts, draft persistency/ > archiving, providing a "monitor this draft" service, and specifics of > authenticating draft submissions. Mmm, not sure about the latter. I think, for instance, that it might be a requirement that we don't have to set up a general submitter (user) data base, but do ad-hoc verification of e.g. return routability to the submitter. Of course, you may draw the line for what's specifics differently than I do here. > > 4. Terminology > > The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", > "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this > document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. When used > with the normative meanings, these keywords will be all uppercase. > Occurrences of these words in lowercase comprise normal prose usage, > with no normative implications. > > Submitter: A human or software submitting an Internet Draft for > publication. A human submitter is likely to use some automation > tools (e.g., an e-mail client), but differs from the software > submitter in that it is a human who explicitly initiates the > submission process and interprets submission results. Do we have non-human submitters? Do we really want to consider such? > Publisher: A human or software validating and publishing a submitted > Internet Draft. A human publisher is likely to use some > automation tools (e.g., a validation tool), but differs from the > software publisher in that it is a human who explicitly initiates > the validation/publication process and interprets its results. > > > 5. Modes > > Tool requirements depend on the submission and publication mode. ID > submission tool MUST support all three modes documented in this > section. Supporting different modes may call for creation of > different tools. (XXX: are all modes in scope?) (XXX: is there a > better term than mode?) > > (XXX: need to do a much better job at showing what requirements apply > > > > Rousskov Expires February 23, 2005 [Page 4] > > Internet-Draft Draft Submission Interface Requirements August 2004 > > > to what tools or tool parts; we are lacking good terminology here). > > 5.1 Full automation mode > > Submission interface SHOULD support draft submissions by software > submitter to software publisher. For example, it should be possible > to configure decent content management software to automatically > submit and instantly publish the draft whenever a new revision of the > draft text is checked in. > > Implementing a CGI interface for POSTing draft text and meta > attributes to a well-known IETF URL would be one way to accommodate a > software submitter (XXX: add WebDAV as another example?). The > software-friendly outcome of the submission can then be expressed via > HTTP status codes (e.g., any code other than 200 or 201 would > indicate a failure). > > The "software publisher" part of the requirement implies that > submitted draft is published or rejected without any human > involvement. I like having something like the full automation mode, but I'm not convinced this mode is appropriate for submissions with a frequency matching checkin of a new cvs/svn/rcs or whatever version. Some authors I know do a new checkin for every individual issue corrected, and generate a diff showing what was done. If every such version was published, it would be much more difficult to have a common baseline when discussing drafts. (This reservation may have no impact on how the I-D submission tool is to be specified and implemented, however) > > 5.2 Publication automation mode > > Submission interface MUST support draft submission by a human > submitter to software publisher. For example, it should be possible > for the draft author to submit and instantly publish the draft > whenever the author feels that the new revision of the draft should > be published. > > Implementing a human-friendly easy-to-find web page where the draft > text can be uploaded along with meta attributes would be one way to > satisfy this requirement. A human-oriented status page can be > returned to indicate the result of the submission. > > The "software publisher" part of the requirement implies that > submission is published or rejected without any human involvement. Yes. Good. > 5.3 Human-to-human mode > > Submission interface MUST support draft submission by a human to a > human, possibly as a last-resort, discouraged option. For example, > Secretariat may provide a human-monitored e-mail address where drafts > can be mailed bypassing automated publishers. > > Using this mode may result in significant publication delays. The > human-assisted submission and publication mechanism MAY use some > automation (e.g., automatic spam detection for e-mail submissions). > If automation is used by default, the mechanism MUST provide a way > > > > Rousskov Expires February 23, 2005 [Page 5] > > Internet-Draft Draft Submission Interface Requirements August 2004 > > > for a human submitter to bypass that automation (e.g., a keyword in > e-mail subject will turn spam filtering off). > > The intent of this mode is to provide a way for submitters to bypass > bugs or limitations of automated mechanisms in order to publish an > unusual draft or to publish a draft under unusual circumstances. Yes, clearly. > 5.4 Dry Run mode > > TBD: Just validation, no publication. I like it. This should be an option both for Full automation and for Publication automation. > 5.5 Mode automation matrix > > The following table summarizes automation rules for the major modes. > > +------------------------+------------+-------------+ > | Mode | Submission | Publication | > +------------------------+------------+-------------+ > | Full automation | software | software | > | Publication automation | human | software | > | Human to human | human | human | > +------------------------+------------+-------------+ > > > 6. Draft Validation > > IETF standards have to follow a set of syntax and semantics > requirements (XXX: provide references to the nits document and IP > policies). Most of those requirements are not enforced for Internet > Drafts. However, following them may improve draft quality, reduce > IESG load, and increase the chances of the draft being approved as an > RFC. Draft submission mechanism MUST validate the drafts. In case > of a human-to-human interface, such validation may be initiated by > the human publisher. One fairly natural way would be for the human publisher to use an extended version of the publication automation interface. > When validating a given draft, it is important to distinguish between > absolute requirements and desirable draft properties. Both are > detailed in the following subsections. > > 6.1 Absolute requirements > > A draft validator MUST check the following requirements and a draft > publisher MUST NOT publish drafts that failed corresponding validator > checks. > > 1. A draft must be submitted by its author, corresponding working > group chair, or corresponding area director (XXX: is this the > right place to explain why we need AD override option to let IESG > > > > Rousskov Expires February 23, 2005 [Page 6] > > Internet-Draft Draft Submission Interface Requirements August 2004 > > > publish draft fixes?). "its author" should probably be "any of its authors or editors" or some such. I don't think we need explain the AD override option. > 2. The initial revision of a Working Group draft must be submitted > by the corresponding working group chair. Do you intentionally exclude sumbission by author, approval by chair here? > 3. Current draft state must allow new revisions to be published. > (XXX: document IESG review states when new revisions are not > allowed). > > 4. Correct draft name (including correct revision number) must > appear in the draft text. > > 5. An IETF IPR statement must appear in the draft text. (XXX: is > this an absolute requirement for a draft?) I think there is more here; basically the applicable parts of 2026, 3667 and 3668 must be followed - this is mostly a matter of checking the presence of boilerplate text. (The idnits tool currently does not have an option to check only the requirements applicable to all draft submissions, but I'd like to add that.) > (XXX: Dry Run mode may not need many of the above checks, depending > on user needs) Mmm, on the contrary; I think dry run mode should be identical to submission mode up to the point where you actually do the submission. Not sure I see why not? > 6.2 Desireable features > > A draft validator SHOULD check the following requirements. A draft > publisher MAY publish drafts failed corresponding validator checks. > > TBD: list testable nits here or refer to the nits document. A starting point for a list of checkable nits could be the nits that are checked by idnits: http://ietf.levkowetz.com/tools/idnits/ > 6.3 Draft text interpretation > > A validator MAY try to partially interpret the draft text in order to > extract embedded data such as draft name or security section. When > corresponding metadata is supplied by the submitter, the validator > can compare the extracted information with supplied metadata. The > absence of identifiable embedded information may trigger validation > errors or warnings. > > Extraction of embedded information may work very well for some draft > formats (e.g., those produced by an xml2rfc tool (XXX: add > reference)) http://xml.resource.org/ > , but it is impossible to reliably identify the format of > a plain text submission. From experience with the idnits tool, I think it may be possible to reach 95% reliability. We might use this to extract meta-data, and present it on a feedback page before the final submission is done, giving the submitter the opportunity to correct it? > > 7. Submission Metadata > > TBD: document what metadata must be supplied: draft name (including > revision number), submitter credentials, is this the last revision of > the draft (to be submitted for IETF last call and IESG review), > format, content-encoding, etc. I don't think "last revision" should be part of this... Can't reliably tell that when submitting a draft. > > > > > > > Rousskov Expires February 23, 2005 [Page 7] > > Internet-Draft Draft Submission Interface Requirements August 2004 > > > 8. Security Considerations > > Some. TBD: Talk about why authentication and anti-spam measures > become important once things become automated. Yes > 9. IANA Considerations > > None. > > 10. Compliance > > TBD: What does it mean to be compliant with (to satisfy) our > requirements? > > Appendix A. Acknowledgments > > TBD. > > Special thanks to Marshall Rose for his xml2rfc tool. > > Appendix B. Change Log > > RFC Editor Note: This section is to be removed during the final > publication of the document. > > Internal WG revision control ID: $Id: id.xml,v 1.4 2004/08/25 > 17:21:43 rousskov Exp $ > > 2004/08/25 > > * Initial revision. > > > 11 Normative References > > [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate > Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. > > > Author's Address > > Alex Rousskov > The Measurement Factory > > EMail: rousskov@measurement-factory.com > URI: http://www.measurement-factory.com/ ... _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 27 09:23:25 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA28082; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:23:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0gib-0001Ao-Vo; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:24:39 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0gWq-0004sP-DM; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:12:28 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0gQI-0003Lr-F7 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:05:42 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA26961 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:05:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av2-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net ([81.228.9.107]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0gRQ-0000n8-GW for tools-team@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:06:53 -0400 Received: by av2-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 608FD37F40; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:05:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp1-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.177]) by av2-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50B0637E55; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:05:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp1-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F31938002; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:05:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C0gPk-000839-HK; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:05:08 +0200 Message-ID: <412F3184.3050907@levkowetz.com> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:05:08 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <4BDDD96BCC40DC0CE84A8622@[192.168.1.225]> In-Reply-To: <4BDDD96BCC40DC0CE84A8622@[192.168.1.225]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: > using different terminology.... playing.... > > documents: stuff that is worked on (charters, I-Ds (my abstract concept > of I-D is without version), RFCs, Web pages, IANA databases....) > > actors: people who do things to documents. some actors are roles filled > by multiple people. > > tasks: stuff that actors are supposed to do to documents. > completing a task may generate a new document, a new task, both, or > neither. so may working on a task without completing it.... > a document can be referred to by multiple tasks simultaneously. a task > can refer to multiple documents. > > events: the result of an actor doing a task to a document (not > necessarily completing it). may leave information behind that should not > be considered a document in its own right. > > we need document repositories (to know what the current document set > is), actor databases (knowing who can do which tasks, and which people > fill roles), task databases (figuring out who's supposed to do what next > to what), and event logs (saying what happened). > > I think most of what we currently have fits within such a model - but we > do things differently in different corners, for historical or practical > reasons. > > ie WG charter change is not tracked in I-D tracker, IANA database > updates are tracked in an IANA spreadsheet, RFC Editor history log is > the archives of the ietf-announce list..... > > sense? Yes, I like it, it's a pretty clean model. One of the complexities may be to provide interfaces to a number of the established ways of working with these things - like mailing lists, repositories, archives... Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 27 09:32:22 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA28488; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:32:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0grH-0001K8-7c; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:33:36 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0giA-00079n-Rb; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:24:10 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0gag-0005gr-WA for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:16:27 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA27702 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:16:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0gbp-00011k-EZ for tools-team@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:17:38 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCD3461BEE; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:15:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 28657-08; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:15:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from halvestr-w2k02.emea.cisco.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0920F61B98; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:15:52 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:15:51 +0200 From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? Message-ID: <7B3130645DAF9E3C66C8F845@[192.168.1.225]> In-Reply-To: <412F3184.3050907@levkowetz.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <4BDDD96BCC40DC0CE84A8622@[192.168.1.225]> <412F3184.3050907@levkowetz.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.5 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 27. august 2004 15:05 +0200 Henrik Levkowetz wrote: >> sense? > > Yes, I like it, it's a pretty clean model. > > One of the complexities may be to provide interfaces to a number of the > established ways of working with these things - like mailing lists, > repositories, archives... yes - we need to keep pretty firmly in mind what the purpose of each piece is, so that we can see when things are the way they are for a reason, and when they are "just because they've always been that way".... _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 27 09:32:25 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA28506; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:32:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0grK-0001KK-VC; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:33:39 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0giA-00079s-Va; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:24:10 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0gb5-0005gx-AC for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:16:51 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA27723 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:16:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net ([81.228.11.110]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0gcE-000148-G6 for tools-team@ietf.org; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:18:03 -0400 Received: by av3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 0E7F137EF5; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:16:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.163]) by av3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF1A037E77; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:16:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp3-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D657C37E4A; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:16:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C0gaY-000869-Ap; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:16:18 +0200 Message-ID: <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:16:18 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> In-Reply-To: <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: a8a20a483a84f747e56475e290ee868e Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: a7d2e37451f7f22841e3b6f40c67db0f Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Two points come to my mind here: 1) With respect to actors / people, we have those who feel it's natural to have a framework identity associated with their role(s) - ADs, Chairs, Secretariat folks etc. - and those of whom I'd be reluctant to require registration with a framework - mailing list participant, draft authors. 2) I think it is good if tools, even if part of a framework, can be deployed in a very decentralised manner - which may mean that they generally have http interfaces - be it using CGI or XML based protocols. I'd be reluctant building a monolith... If we can find or build a framework on such a basis, I think it might be a good idea. Or maybe that means we're talking about a common library rather than a framework? Henrik Alex Rousskov wrote: > >> * Alex will re-initiate the discussion on the >> tools-team@ietf.org list, as a continuation of the >> discussion about needed tools, components, requirements >> etc which was started before IETF-60, but temporarily >> put on hold. > > > I suggest that we spend a few cycles discussing an "IETF tools > framework" that will mention key IETF tools and focus on tools > relationships and common components rather than individual tool > requirements. Depending on the initial result, we can decide to document > the framework somewhere or abandon the idea. > > Here are a few major framework areas that I can identify: > > 1. Document Repository: includes meta-information and > actual texts for drafts, RFCs, errata, WG charters, > agendas, minutes, etc. I am not sure whether WG mailing > list archives and issue lists belong here, but I suspect > they do. > > 2. People Repository: information about IETF participants, > initially populated with information about IESG, Chairs, > and Authors to facilitate IETF-wide authentication. > Should this be an Actor or Entity Repository instead > to include information about WGs, teams, IESG, IAB, etc? > > 3. Event Queue: document publication, standard approval, errata > updates and similar events. This area is essential for > implementing "monitor this WG/draft/etc" or "let me know > of any last calls" services. Some events might not be > "stored" anywhere, but may trigger updates of document > and people repositories, among other things. > > If the above makes sense, we can then describe major tool interaction > and major shared components in terms of their effects on the above areas. > > For example, we can say that ID submission tool uses People Repository > to authenticate the submitter of the draft, places the new revision into > the Document Repository, and generates events such as "draft updated" or > "new WG draft available". These events may reach interested parties, > including, for example, authors of documents that refer to the updated > draft. > > Furthermore, given the above framework, corresponding shared > tools/interfaces come into picture: > > 1. Document Repository Manager: accepts new documents and > meta-information, maintains links among documents, deletes > documents, etc. > > 2. People Repository Manager: same as Document Repository > Manager but for information about IETF participants. This > manager can perform authentication among other things. > > 3. Event Dispatcher: queues "let me know when..." requests, > accepts new events, archives them(?), and forwards them > to those who wanted to be informed of them. > > While a comprehensive framework (the above is just an incomplete and > buggy sketch) would both make building tools easier and give IETFers a > coherent "IETF interface", I do not know whether IETF Secretariat would > be willing to move from a collection of isolated tools to a "system". It > is certainly easier to build any given isolated tool than to build the > framework and the tool. Savings and benefits from a coherent framework > can only be long-term... > > One the other hand, several items on Secretariat TODO list and Harald > comments during one of the conference calls may indicate desire to move > away from individual tools to a more organized approach. We certainly do > not have to wait for a complete framework to start implementing key > tools; the question is one of the direction and willingness to spend > "enough" cycles on long-term goals while doing individual tool > development/adoption. > > I would be interested in hearing comments from TOOLs members _and_ > Secretariat/IESG folks. Do we want to move in the coherent framework > direction? _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 27 11:38:34 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA10397; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:38:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0ipS-0004Tq-0x; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:39:50 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0ig0-0005XR-3Z; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:30:04 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C0ibq-00040O-Hl for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:25:47 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA09332; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:25:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from colossus.foretec.com ([132.151.1.197] helo=foretec.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0id0-0004AK-Dj; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:26:58 -0400 Received: from cnri-7-144.cnri.reston.va.us ([132.151.7.144] helo=D1GSDG11.foretec.com) by foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1C0ibp-0007Zu-00; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:25:45 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040826165128.0213c240@colossus.foretec.com> X-Sender: bfuller@colossus.foretec.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:21:26 -0400 To: Alex Rousskov , tools-team@ietf.org From: "Barbara B. Fuller" Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Requirements for IETF Draft Submission Interface, v1.4 In-Reply-To: <20040825110109.K49770@measurement-factory.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 96e0f8497f38c15fbfc8f6f315bcdecb Cc: Dinara Suleymanova , Rebecca Bunch , Michael Lee X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 5b943e80df8c8cad631fd60298783617 Hi Alex: Several members of the Secretariat staff have reviewed your I-D, and their combined comments are provided "in-line" below. In addition, the staff would like to raise one terminology issue, namely, the use of the word "publication" rather than the word "posting" to describe the addition of an I-D to the I-D directory. Use of the word "publication" in regard to an I-D can sometimes be confusing. That is, when people talk about publishing an I-D, they often mean publishing it as an RFC. For example, the first "official" state for an I-D in the I-D Tracker is "Publication Requested." Therefore, we suggest that you consider changing the word "publication" to "posting," the word "publish" to "post," etc. throughout the document. The tool would be used for submitting and posting Internet-Drafts. Please let us know if you have any questions about our in-line comments. As I mentioned in a previous message, the Secretariat will provide high-level requirements for the I-D submission and posting tool sometime next week. Regards, Barbara ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Tool Status Quo To get an Internet Draft published, an IETF participant e-mails draft text to the IETF Secretariat, along with an informal note asking to publish the draft. Secretariat staff reads the note, reviews, and then approves or rejects the submission. An approved draft is automatically (XXX: or manually?) copied to IETF web site, with the corresponding announcement sent to appropriate IETF mailing list(s). COMMENT: The Secretariat processes I-Ds manually. Since processing involves more than just copying the I-D to the I-D directory (e.g., it also involves updating the databases), we suggest that you change the final sentence above to read: "An approved draft is manually processed, and an I-D Action announcement is sent to the appropriate IETF mailing list(s)." Collectively, IETF participants submit thousands (XXX: is there a more accurate number?) of Internet Drafts per year (XXX: provide individual and WG submission numbers separately). COMMENT: The Secretariat does not maintain statistics on the number of I-Ds submitted...only on the number of I-Ds posted to the I-D directory. For the period January 1-December 31, 2003, the Secretariat posted 2,108 I-Ds. The breakdown is as follows: New WG I-Ds: 384 New Individual I-Ds: 1091 Updated WG I-Ds: 288 Updated Individual I-Ds: 345 The vast majority of submitted drafts are approved for publication (XXX: are stats available?). COMMENT: In each category, the number of I-Ds approved for posting is the same as the number of I-Ds posted. It usually takes the Secretariat 12-24 hours (XXX: are stats available?) to review the draft. COMMENT: This statement is somewhat misleading. It takes the Secretariat only a few minutes to process an I-D. However, it may take several hours before the I-D appears on the Web site due to the rsync schedule. Furthermore, if I-Ds are submitted after COB on Friday, it can take a couple of days for them to appear on the Web site since the staff does not work 24/7. Due to much higher demand and fixed processing capacity, reviews around IETF face-to-face meetings take much longer, creating a long queue of unprocessed drafts that are then announced nearly simultaneously. To reduce Secretariat load (XXX: are there other reasons?), drafts submitted close to IETF meetings are ignored. COMMENT: There are established "pre-meeting" cutoff dates/times for new I-Ds and updates to existing I-Ds. The Secretariat receives a large number of I-D submissions immediately before the deadline. Therefore, it may take several days to post them all. As per standard procedures, the Secretariat does not accept I-D submissions between the "pre-meeting" cutoff date for updates to I-Ds and the Monday of the meeting week. The Secretariat *never* ignores an I-D. 5. Modes Tool requirements depend on the submission and publication mode. ID submission tool MUST support all three modes documented in this section. Supporting different modes may call for creation of different tools. (XXX: are all modes in scope?) (XXX: is there a better term than mode?) (XXX: need to do a much better job at showing what requirements apply to what tools or tool parts; we are lacking good terminology here). 5.1 Full automation mode Submission interface SHOULD support draft submissions by software submitter to software publisher. For example, it should be possible to configure decent content management software to automatically submit and instantly publish the draft whenever a new revision of the draft text is checked in. COMMENT: If a newly submitted I-D is a Working Group submission and version -00, then the Secretariat must obtain approval from the WG chair before posting the document. Thus, it is impossible to post the I-D *instantly* in such a case. Implementing a CGI interface for POSTing draft text and meta attributes to a well-known IETF URL would be one way to accommodate a software submitter (XXX: add WebDAV as another example?). The software-friendly outcome of the submission can then be expressed via HTTP status codes (e.g., any code other than 200 or 201 would indicate a failure). The "software publisher" part of the requirement implies that submitted draft is published or rejected without any human involvement. COMMENT: Again, it is impossible to process version -00 WG submissions without any human involvement. The Secretariat must obtain the approval of the WG chair. 5.2 Publication automation mode Submission interface MUST support draft submission by a human submitter to software publisher. For example, it should be possible for the draft author to submit and instantly publish the draft whenever the author feels that the new revision of the draft should be published. Implementing a human-friendly easy-to-find web page where the draft text can be uploaded along with meta attributes would be one way to satisfy this requirement. A human-oriented status page can be returned to indicate the result of the submission. The "software publisher" part of the requirement implies that submission is published or rejected without any human involvement. COMMENT: There does not appear to be much of a difference between this mode and "Full Automation Mode." In both cases, the submitter still needs to fill in all of the essential fields (i.e., the required meta attributes). Also, in both cases, the submitted I-D must be validated before it goes to the "Posting Software" or to the WG chair for approval. The only difference between the two modes is that the "Full Automation Mode" seems to call for "Copy and Paste" of the I-D, whereas this mode calls for "Uploading" the I-D. It would be helpful if you could provide more information on the differences between these two modes. 5.3 Human-to-human mode Submission interface MUST support draft submission by a human to a human, possibly as a last-resort, discouraged option. For example, Secretariat may provide a human-monitored e-mail address where drafts can be mailed bypassing automated publishers. Using this mode may result in significant publication delays. The human-assisted submission and publication mechanism MAY use some automation (e.g., automatic spam detection for e-mail submissions). If automation is used by default, the mechanism MUST provide a way for a human submitter to bypass that automation (e.g., a keyword in e-mail subject will turn spam filtering off). The intent of this mode is to provide a way for submitters to bypass bugs or limitations of automated mechanisms in order to publish an unusual draft or to publish a draft under unusual circumstances. COMMENT: The email submission mode would be available for submitters who are unable to access the Web tool at the time they want to submit an I-D. However, the Secretariat does not post "unusual" I-Ds. That is, the Secretariat posts all I-Ds that adhere to the requirements and for which it has obtained the necessary approvals. It would be helpful if you could provide some examples of unusual drafts or unusual circumstances. 5.4 Dry Run mode TBD: Just validation, no publication. 5.5 Mode automation matrix The following table summarizes automation rules for the major modes. +------------------------+------------+-------------+ | Mode | Submission | Publication | +------------------------+------------+-------------+ | Full automation | software | software | | Publication automation | human | software | | Human to human | human | human | +------------------------+------------+-------------+ COMMENT: The matrix seems confusing. Specifically, the use of the term "human" is not clear. Based on Section 5.3, it appears that the "human" mode implies the use of email for that part of the process being discussed, i.e., for either the "Submission" or "Publication" ("Posting") of the I-D. However, in both the "Full automation" and "Publication automation" modes, the submitter uses a Web interface to enter information on the I-D. Therefore, it is not clear why the "Submission" process is labeled as "software" for the "Full automation" mode and as "human" for the "Publication automation" mode. Furthermore, in the "Human to human" mode, the submitter may indeed submit a request to post an I-D via email. However, that would not prevent the Secretariat from using the software to post the I-D. Thus, the "Human to human" mode is really "human" submission and a combination of "human" (to read the email) and "software" for posting. Finally, if one considers the fact that the WG chairs would be notified by email when approval is required for version -00 postings, it seems that all three modes involve some level of human processing. 6. Draft Validation IETF standards have to follow a set of syntax and semantics requirements (XXX: provide references to the nits document and IP policies). Most of those requirements are not enforced for Internet Drafts. However, following them may improve draft quality, reduce IESG load, and increase the chances of the draft being approved as an RFC. Draft submission mechanism MUST validate the drafts. In case of a human-to-human interface, such validation may be initiated by the human publisher. When validating a given draft, it is important to distinguish between absolute requirements and desirable draft properties. Both are detailed in the following subsections. 6.1 Absolute requirements A draft validator MUST check the following requirements and a draft publisher MUST NOT publish drafts that failed corresponding validator checks. 1. A draft must be submitted by its author, corresponding working group chair, or corresponding area director (XXX: is this the right place to explain why we need AD override option to let IESG publish draft fixes?). COMMENT: The IESG guidelines for the Secretariat are that tools should implement existing procedures and not create or modify procedures. AD override is not an existing procedure. Suggestions for creating or modifying procedures should be submitted to, and approved by, the IESG before these procedures are implemented in a tool. 2. The initial revision of a Working Group draft must be submitted by the corresponding working group chair. COMMENT: What do you mean by an "initial revision"? An initial draft is a version -00 document, and if it is a WG submission, then it must be approved by the WG chair prior to posting. A revised draft is a version -01 or higher document, and may be submitted by the author and posted by the Secretariat without approval of the WG chair. 3. Current draft state must allow new revisions to be published. (XXX: document IESG review states when new revisions are not allowed). COMMENT: I-Ds can be updated when they are in the states "I-D Exists" or "AD is watching" in the I-D Tracker. Once publication is requested and the document moves to the state "Publication Requested," the document cannot be revised unless the shepherding AD requests revisions. 4. Correct draft name (including correct revision number) must appear in the draft text. 5. An IETF IPR statement must appear in the draft text. (XXX: is this an absolute requirement for a draft?) (XXX: Dry Run mode may not need many of the above checks, depending on user needs) 7. Submission Metadata TBD: document what metadata must be supplied: draft name (including revision number), submitter credentials, is this the last revision of the draft (to be submitted for IETF last call and IESG review), format, content-encoding, etc. COMMENT: The Secretariat's requirements will include the metadata that the Secretariat needs to process I-Ds and update its databases. 8. Security Considerations Some. TBD: Talk about why authentication and anti-spam measures become important once things become automated. COMMENT: Since this is a Web-based tool, it is not clear how "anti-spam measures" apply. The IESG guidelines for the Secretariat are that tools designed for the community should be available to the public and not require authentication (since the IETF is not a membership organization). If the TOOLS Team feels that authentication mechanisms are appropriate (i.e., based on input from the community), then the Team should probably obtain approval from the IESG before implementing such mechanisms. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- At 11:27 AM 8/25/2004 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote: >Hi, > > My initial take at the ID submission requirements draft is > attached as plain text and HTML files. > > I do not like the current organization of the draft, but I would > like to hear your high-level comments before polishing it. Specifically, > > - Should we be talking about different modes of > draft submission? The draft itentifies 3.5 modes (see > Section 5). We can simplify a lot if we focus on one mode > only, but I think that all currently documented modes > except for "Full Automation" are essential for > a good draft submission environment. And "Full Automation" > is the direction we should be moving in long-term. > > - I am having trouble coming up with good terminology > to name the subject of our requirements. Especially > with multiple modes, we are not talking aboutra > single ID submission tool or interface. We are talking about > several tools, and each tool has at least two > sides/interfaces: submitter and publisher. Is there > a better terminology than "ID submission tool"? > > - What do we do if ideal draft submission environment > conflicts with current IETF rules. For example, if > the tool allows for instant publication, some drafts > may have more than 99 published versions and refering > to a draft by its name and version should be exception > rather than the rule (just the name should be used in > most cases). Can we suggest such changes to the IETF? > > - Should I delete the "Status Quo" section? (Section 2) > >Thanks, > >Alex. >_______________________________________________ >Tools-team mailing list >Tools-team@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team ------------------------------------------------ Barbara B. Fuller Acting Executive Director Internet Engineering Task Force Natick, Massachusetts Office: Phone: +1-508-650-4020 Fax: +1-508-650-4639 Reston, Virginia Office: Phone: +1-703-620-9053 Fax: +1-703-620-9071 _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sat Aug 28 13:28:30 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00373; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:28:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C171c-0007ou-13; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:30:00 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C16vV-0000ks-Rl; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:23:41 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C16rc-0000Hm-Ck for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:19:40 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA29971 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:19:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exprod6ob4.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.214] helo=psmtp.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C16sy-0007i1-Fn for tools-team@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:21:06 -0400 Received: from source ([192.150.22.8]) by exprod6ob4.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:19:36 PDT Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-1 [153.32.1.51]) by smtp-relay-8.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7SHJKbA016930 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:19:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7SHJKTk029229 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:19:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 ([130.248.176.17]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I3600LGA2S8TZ@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> for tools-team@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:19:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:19:20 -0700 From: Larry Masinter To: tools-team@ietf.org Message-id: <0I3600LGB2S8TZ@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcSNIyd/7+NqdcKrTM6Uda2Az3XxEg== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 02ec665d00de228c50c93ed6b5e4fc1a Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Tools-team] draft announcement of tools-discuss X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b4a0a5f5992e2a4954405484e7717d8c Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT as per action item, please discuss =========================== To: internet announce mailing list, wgchairs from: someone other than me Subject: IETF 'tools' team started, new list tools-discuss@ietf.org As part of the overall effort to improve IETF operations and structure, a 'tools' group has been chartered to develop a requirements for electronic tools to aid in the IETF operations. This message announces a public discussion list, tools-discuss@ietf.org for the community to gathering and discuss requirements, suggestions, and priorities for IETF-related tools. Briefly, the charter of the group http:/// ... focuses primarily on tools to improve the interface between IETF administration and the broader community, and secondarily to aid in the operation of individual working groups and the tasks of standards development. The tools group aims to coordinate with the ongoing developments in IETF administrative realignment. Recently, many new tools have already been started and are in use; this group will continue with the process. https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/show_tasks.cgi?mode=all Web site: http://tools.ietf.org Schedule: The group will initially focus on additional tools (not already specified or in progress) for use by the Secretariat. An draft set of requirements for an Internet Drafts Submission Tool will be posted shortly. Other secretariat tools are expected to be specified over the next six months. We will put together a list and priority schedule within that time frame. The tools team may also survey the community for input on priorities, requirements, and feedback on currently deployed tools. Internet Drafts in preparation: Internet Drafts Submissions Tool _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sat Aug 28 13:28:42 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00400; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:28:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C171n-0007pC-4l; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:30:12 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C16vV-0000kx-Vs; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:23:41 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C16sP-0000N7-Ho for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:20:29 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00022 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:20:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exprod6ob1.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.211] helo=psmtp.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C16tm-0007iu-V7 for tools-team@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:21:56 -0400 Received: from source ([192.150.22.7]) by exprod6ob1.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:20:26 PDT Received: from inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-3 [153.32.251.51]) by smtp-relay-7.sea.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7SHKQNf017353 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:20:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7SHKQkq002595 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:20:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 ([130.248.176.17]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I3600LIK2U1TZ@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> for tools-team@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:20:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:20:25 -0700 From: Larry Masinter To: tools-team@ietf.org Message-id: <0I3600LIL2U1TZ@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Organization: Adobe Systems MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcSNIPgHAQWuYhs8SGW5bbB8JqHVCg== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Tools-team] comments on Submissions Interface tools draft X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 538aad3a3c4f01d8b6a6477ca4248793 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT The section "Tools Status Quo" seems to actually mix a description of the "Status Quo" with some analysis and recommendations. I'd suggest just renaming it "Tool Status Quo" => "Current state" "asking to publish the draft" => "asking that the draft be posted" The sections starting with "Informal interface for submitting and publishing..." seem to be analysis rather than description, and are somewhat controversial. I think we need to examine them carefully. For example: Anybody and anything can submit a draft for publication. There is no reliable authentication mechanism. Initial submissions of WG drafts require WG Chair approval, which is as easy to fake as the submission request itself. While email comes from anywhere, the I-D submission email address can distinguish spam from actual submissions, and the fact that there is a person in the loop discourages fraud. Similarly, may not be so easy to 'fake' WG chair approval, because the checking for WG chair approval isn't automated -- a person actually reads it and decides, based on the message content, that it comes from the WG chair. In any case, I would put these paragraphs in another section, labeled "analysis of current state" rather than under "Status Quo". I'd like a section on "wish list items": things that would be nice, even if they're not requirements. I would include in this the ability to accept and to have posted the XML version of Internet Drafts. This is something that's hard to do with the manual process currently but would become easier if the process were automated. Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sat Aug 28 13:31:07 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00573; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:31:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1747-0007rY-7R; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:32:35 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C170m-0001Q0-6m; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:29:08 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C16zh-00018H-Nh for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:28:01 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00327 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:27:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exprod6ob2.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.212] helo=psmtp.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1712-0007oB-VK for tools-team@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 13:29:28 -0400 Received: from source ([192.150.22.8]) by exprod6ob2.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:27:56 PDT Received: from inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-3 [153.32.251.51]) by smtp-relay-8.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7SHRfbA017040 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:27:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7SHRekq002761 for ; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:27:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 ([130.248.176.17]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I3600LUI364TZ@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> for tools-team@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:27:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:27:40 -0700 From: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? In-reply-to: <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> To: tools-team@ietf.org Message-id: <0I3600LUJ364TZ@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcSMOkxXR7XYkfGLTvuSXEnf5SrAnwA6UjPg X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e1e48a527f609d1be2bc8d8a70eb76cb Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT > Two points come to my mind here: > > 1) With respect to actors / people, we have those who feel it's > natural to have a framework identity associated with their > role(s) - ADs, Chairs, Secretariat folks etc. - and those of > whom I'd be reluctant to require registration with a framework > - mailing list participant, draft authors. We may need to require registration for those participants for which authentication is necessary. I think this may include, if not "draft authors" at least "draft posters", i.e., the author who posts an Internet Draft. Mailing list participants do not require authentication only because there is a simple check on bogus postings: mailing lists that only allow members to post have the insurance that the purported author will get a copy, and can detect forgeries. (There are some lists that are getting virus-spam that seems to be from mailing list members, though; if this becomes a more serious problem, we may start to want authentication, and thus registration, even for mailing list participants.) > 2) I think it is good if tools, even if part of a framework, can > be deployed in a very decentralised manner - which may mean > that they generally have http interfaces - be it using CGI > or XML based protocols. I'd be reluctant building a monolith... > > If we can find or build a framework on such a basis, I think it might > be a good idea. Or maybe that means we're talking about a common > library rather than a framework? Most distributed system technology these days is designed to be deployed in a distributed manner, whether it is EJB or web services. Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 29 05:41:01 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA26550; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 05:41:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1MCt-0007I9-V6; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 05:42:40 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1M9I-0005JP-U5; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 05:38:56 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1M7q-00057v-30 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 05:37:26 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA26482 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 05:37:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1M9M-0007Fl-Fb for tools-team@ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 05:39:01 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7036861BDA; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 11:36:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 01984-08; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 11:36:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from halvestr-w2k02.emea.cisco.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37E4761AD4; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 11:36:51 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 14:42:51 +0200 From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand To: Henrik Levkowetz , Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.5 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no X-Spam-Score: 0.4 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6e9349e01d62f32 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.4 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 27. august 2004 15:16 +0200 Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > If we can find or build a framework on such a basis, I think it might > be a good idea. Or maybe that means we're talking about a common > library rather than a framework? I'm thinking in terms of a conceptual framework, so that we're able to talk about the things using the same terms... I'd think that implementing such a framework is a far more ambitious undertaking. BTW: Mailing list members already have identities in the system (their email address). We should make sure the system mostly works without requiring that identity to be linked to a person - unless we have to. I think we have to for someone who submits an internet-draft, given that this person makes IPR guarantees that the IETF depends on..... but that's something we may need to ask a lawyer about. Harald _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 29 08:34:29 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA04327; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 08:34:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1Oul-0001Dr-6p; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 08:36:08 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1Onq-0003Cl-Kl; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 08:28:58 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1Oik-0002Wc-WE for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 08:23:43 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA03580 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 08:23:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av5-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net ([81.228.9.114]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1OkG-00014E-NE for tools-team@ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 08:25:20 -0400 Received: by av5-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id A109737EEE; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 14:23:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.178]) by av5-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91E3E37E47; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 14:23:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E93C38008; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 14:23:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C1OiB-000884-6Y; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 14:23:07 +0200 Message-ID: <4131CAAA.6050805@levkowetz.com> Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 14:23:06 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Macintosh/20040626) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 39bd8f8cbb76cae18b7e23f7cf6b2b9f Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: > I think we have to for someone who submits an internet-draft, given that > this person makes IPR guarantees that the IETF depends on..... but > that's something we may need to ask a lawyer about. Whups, that could be a rather major requirement. I've been thinking in terms of return routability (as tested when you sign up for a mailing list) coupled with the requirement that the submitter address being one of the appropriate WG chairs or one of the addresses given in the Authors' Address section of the draft. I've also personally had a preference for this over a system where you have to register as user in any kind of framework in order to be permitted to submit a draft - this smacks too much of the membership register we don't have. However, having to have guarantees about the linkage of a submitter ID (email-address) to a particular person takes us off in a different direction, where we may have to require that submissions are signed in a way that with reasonable certainty links the submission to a person. GPG signatures might or might not be sufficient - perhaps only signatures based on certs issued by some (which?) CA's will be acceptable, and/or GPG signatures based on GPG keys which have a signature chain back to a ?? chair or AD ?? Mmm, this requirement would be a requirement on drafts submitted for publication, rather than all drafts, I think? Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 29 15:34:38 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA00922; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:34:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1VTQ-00073j-KD; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:36:21 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1VMh-00053N-E2; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:29:23 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1VKY-00046P-KW for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:27:10 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA00470 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:27:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exprod6ob3.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.213] helo=psmtp.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1VM2-0006xX-JD for tools-team@ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:28:51 -0400 Received: from source ([192.150.22.8]) by exprod6ob3.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 12:26:59 PDT Received: from inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-3 [153.32.251.51]) by smtp-relay-8.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7TJQibA002554 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 12:26:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7TJQikq010137 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 12:26:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 ([130.248.178.25]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I3800FHO3CJJD@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> for tools-team@ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 12:26:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 12:26:43 -0700 From: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? In-reply-to: <4131CAAA.6050805@levkowetz.com> To: tools-team@ietf.org Message-id: <0I3800FHP3CJJD@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcSNxIgeOAhzZiqURCChEAfYYU8Q3gAOQhow X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Trust, but verify. For example: It is possible to accept drafts for which verification of the submitter's identity has not been obtained, but note this fact, in the draft or the draft index. Rather than making authentication by one mechanism or another a requirement, leave it an option, and make it visible. Readers may want to take measures to validate the origin of drafts for which authorship is uncertain. Larry _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 29 15:45:08 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA01481; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:45:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1Vda-0007CG-3s; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:46:51 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1VXf-0001CW-1x; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:40:43 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1VU4-00089v-4c for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:37:00 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA01022 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:36:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1VVf-00074z-PX for tools-team@ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:38:41 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC21961B8D; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:36:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 12202-03; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:36:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from halvestr-w2k02.emea.cisco.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 447A661AD4; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:36:23 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:35:43 +0200 From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? Message-ID: <971690C5AB73847D40FBB922@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> In-Reply-To: <4131CAAA.6050805@levkowetz.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <4131CAAA.6050805@levkowetz.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.5 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit All drafts, period. I don't think we actually need to be able to PROVE identity. But we do need to be able to do some kind of "did you submit this?" check if the issue ever comes up. I'll check with the lawyer.... --On 29. august 2004 14:23 +0200 Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > Mmm, this requirement would be a requirement on drafts submitted for > publication, rather than all drafts, I think? _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 29 16:00:36 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA02070; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:00:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1VsY-0007W0-A7; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:02:19 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1VmA-00079k-Qd; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:55:42 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1Vf4-0004Gj-Ag for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:48:22 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA01568 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:48:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av1-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.116]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1Vgg-0007EE-5J for tools-team@ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:50:03 -0400 Received: by av1-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 2BD3437EA5; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:47:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.182]) by av1-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ACE937E44; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:47:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FC4737E44; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:47:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C1Vea-0007aC-00; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:47:52 +0200 Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:47:52 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? Message-Id: <20040829214752.19ba869a@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <971690C5AB73847D40FBB922@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <4131CAAA.6050805@levkowetz.com> <971690C5AB73847D40FBB922@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6e9349e01d62f32 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Harald, On Sunday, 29 Aug 2004, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: > All drafts, period. That's pretty clear, then :-) > I don't think we actually need to be able to PROVE identity. > But we do need to be able to do some kind of "did you submit this?" check > if the issue ever comes up. Ok, that makes a verification similar to mailing list subscription verifications more feasible again. > I'll check with the lawyer.... Good :-) Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 29 16:03:34 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA02184; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:03:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1VvQ-0007YV-W1; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:05:18 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1Vqv-0000u4-75; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:00:37 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1Vlf-0006sO-15 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:55:11 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA01825 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:55:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av5-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net ([81.228.9.113]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1VnG-0007Ic-SX for tools-team@ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:56:52 -0400 Received: by av5-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 1B01F37F45; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:54:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.178]) by av5-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CF0437E44; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:54:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E63B83800E; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:54:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C1VlB-0007bU-00; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:54:41 +0200 Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:54:38 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Larry Masinter Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? Message-Id: <20040829215438.3911c0d7@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <0I3800FHP3CJJD@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> References: <4131CAAA.6050805@levkowetz.com> <0I3800FHP3CJJD@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sunday, 29 Aug 2004, Larry Masinter wrote: > It is possible to accept drafts for which verification of > the submitter's identity has not been obtained, but note > this fact, in the draft or the draft index. That is an interesting idea :-) Should be not too difficult to handle e.g. S/MIME or PGP signed submission verification mails, and note the level of verification in an index. > Rather than making authentication by one mechanism or > another a requirement, leave it an option, and make > it visible. > > Readers may want to take measures to validate the > origin of drafts for which authorship is uncertain. However, it does not really handle the general issue of what kind of certainty of identity the IETF can accept (in general) for the submitter of a draft... Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 29 16:13:07 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA02646; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:13:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1W4f-0007fY-Jq; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:14:50 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1VyR-00049e-A9; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:08:23 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1Vvs-00033r-BI for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:05:44 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA02337 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:05:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av9-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.107]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1VxU-0007ZY-B9 for tools-team@ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:07:25 -0400 Received: by av9-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id F16D637EC8; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 22:05:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.182]) by av9-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF75037E59 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 22:05:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF16037E52 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 22:05:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C1VvP-0007eJ-00 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 22:05:15 +0200 Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 22:05:15 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: tools-team@ietf.org Message-Id: <20040829220515.3899900d@chardonnay> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 68c8cc8a64a9d0402e43b8eee9fc4199 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] tools-team wiki X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, The tools-team wiki is now up and available at either of these two URLs: http://www.levkowetz.com/tools.ietf.org/wiki/ http://ietf.levkowetz.com/team/tools/wiki/ with tools.ietf.org in place, the url will be http://tools.ietf.org/wiki/ Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 29 18:42:20 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA13927; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 18:42:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1YP7-00028I-QV; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 18:44:06 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1YM4-0008Nj-4U; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 18:40:56 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1YKs-0008E8-26 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 18:39:42 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA13781 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 18:39:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-dark.research.att.com ([192.20.225.112] helo=mail-yellow.research.att.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1YMV-00024q-AP for tools-team@ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 18:41:24 -0400 Received: from windsor.research.att.com (windsor.research.att.com [135.207.26.46]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48B681974C2; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 18:34:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.8.5) id i7TMd0W19542; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:39:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200408292239.i7TMd0W19542@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: henrik@levkowetz.com Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:38:57 -0700 From: Bill Fenner Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.6d/makemail 2.10 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 1ac7cc0a4cd376402b85bc1961a86ac2 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126 > 2) I think it is good if tools, even if part of a framework, can > be deployed in a very decentralised manner - which may mean > that they generally have http interfaces - be it using CGI > or XML based protocols. I'd be reluctant building a monolith... IMHO, s/good/critical/ I'd be willing to bet that we'll need to interact with someone who wants to use their own tools (or the same tools on their own infrastructure). E.g., the event of "IESG approves RFC" may need to travel to the RFC-Editor's tracking system. Bill _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 29 19:33:55 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA16437; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:33:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1ZD3-000373-O5; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:35:41 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1Z9E-00083p-0m; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:31:44 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1Z7h-0007j6-Si for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:30:09 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA16187 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:30:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av7-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.110]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1Z9L-00030Z-ML for tools-team@ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:31:53 -0400 Received: by av7-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id ED09337EC5; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 01:29:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.182]) by av7-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA0BB37E48; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 01:29:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF92B37E43; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 01:29:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C1Z7A-0008Dy-3b; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 01:29:36 +0200 Message-ID: <413266E0.2000505@levkowetz.com> Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 01:29:36 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Macintosh/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Fenner Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <200408292239.i7TMd0W19542@windsor.research.att.com> In-Reply-To: <200408292239.i7TMd0W19542@windsor.research.att.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill Fenner wrote: >> 2) I think it is good if tools, even if part of a framework, can >> be deployed in a very decentralised manner - which may mean >> that they generally have http interfaces - be it using CGI >> or XML based protocols. I'd be reluctant building a monolith... > > > IMHO, s/good/critical/ > > I'd be willing to bet that we'll need to interact with someone who > wants to use their own tools (or the same tools on their own > infrastructure). E.g., the event of "IESG approves RFC" may > need to travel to the RFC-Editor's tracking system. Check. No contest. Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 29 20:19:41 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA18889; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:19:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1ZvK-0003yD-Al; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:21:26 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1ZsO-0004nq-F0; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:18:24 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1Zqj-0004fj-0O for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:16:41 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA18716 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:16:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exprod6ob3.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.213] helo=psmtp.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1ZsM-0003u2-Rx for tools-team@ietf.org; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:18:24 -0400 Received: from source ([192.150.22.7]) by exprod6ob3.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:16:30 PDT Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-1 [153.32.1.51]) by smtp-relay-7.sea.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7U0GTNf007858; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:16:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7U0GSTk021250; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:16:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 ([130.248.178.105]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I380042QGRG38@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:16:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:16:28 -0700 From: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] tools-team wiki In-reply-to: <20040829220515.3899900d@chardonnay> To: "'Henrik Levkowetz'" , tools-team@ietf.org Message-id: <0I380042RGRG38@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcSOBJq48xb1gk8fR7i3oedgaSNUtgAIdzuQ X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT ok, I posted the draft announcement to http://www.levkowetz.com/tools.ietf.org/wiki/ToolsTeamAnnouncement so that you can comment or change it the Wiki Way. Larry _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 04:21:03 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA00856; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 04:21:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1hRE-0005VB-6G; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 04:22:53 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1hOr-0003CI-4o; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 04:20:25 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1hKG-0002lU-HH for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 04:15:40 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA00548 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 04:15:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1hLz-0005NQ-TH for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 04:17:28 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32D5C61BAB for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:15:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 01116-06 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:15:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from halvestr-w2k02.emea.cisco.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F74361AD5 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:15:07 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:38:25 +0200 From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand To: tools-team@ietf.org Message-ID: <6E330583E4BA495B32568E1F@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.5 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] W3C archive-approval system X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 1ac7cc0a4cd376402b85bc1961a86ac2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For those who have not yet encountered this one: It's what happens when IPR issues meet the Web full force.... nice to know about. Harald _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 11:36:48 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA02418; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:36:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1oEz-0006rF-9J; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:38:42 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1oBM-0004Tp-2I; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:34:56 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1o6X-0003md-TJ for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:29:57 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA02017 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:29:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1o8J-0006h8-TD for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:31:49 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7UFTo9d063732 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:29:50 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7UFToGv063731; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:29:50 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:29:50 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: tools-team@ietf.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040830092519.Q62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 1ac7cc0a4cd376402b85bc1961a86ac2 Subject: [Tools-team] where to document the framework? X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126 I did not hear any strong objections to defining an IETF interfaces framework. There were several very useful comments, and I suspect we can unify them without major battles. I would like to make sure these ideas do not disappear without a record, and I would like to be able to refer to them when polishing the ID submission draft. What is the best way to document the framework? A stand-alone draft? As a part of the Tools Inventory draft? A wiki page? Something else? Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 12:34:41 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA06474; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:34:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1p91-00083Z-5T; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:36:36 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1p0t-0002Uk-2d; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:28:11 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1or3-0001Ig-P4 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:18:01 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA05248 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:17:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av9-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.108]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1oso-0007iG-Hk for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:19:53 -0400 Received: by av9-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 3E5AF37EA5; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 18:17:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.183]) by av9-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F86037E48; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 18:17:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EA7B37E6B; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 18:17:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C1oqU-0002vS-00; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 18:17:26 +0200 Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 18:17:26 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] where to document the framework? Message-Id: <20040830181726.257a75c4@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <20040830092519.Q62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830092519.Q62186@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alex, On Monday, 30 Aug 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote: > I did not hear any strong objections to defining an IETF interfaces > framework. There were several very useful comments, and I suspect we > can unify them without major battles. I would like to make sure these > ideas do not disappear without a record, and I would like to be able > to refer to them when polishing the ID submission draft. > > What is the best way to document the framework? A stand-alone draft? > As a part of the Tools Inventory draft? A wiki page? Something else? What about starting it off as a wiki page? I've started pulling together the tools inventory, but I'm going to do it on the wiki first, then do the draft - there are a number of links associated, and the draft format more cumbersome than a wiki page while trying to organize this. Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 12:44:04 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA07399; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:44:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1pI7-0008Fa-2K; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:45:59 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1p7H-0003cr-TB; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:34:47 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1p18-0002Vt-Ac for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:28:26 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA05966 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:28:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1p2v-0007um-QW; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:30:18 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7UGSI9d066140; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:28:18 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7UGSIDv066139; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:28:18 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:28:18 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: "Barbara B. Fuller" Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Requirements for IETF Draft Submission Interface, v1.4 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20040826165128.0213c240@colossus.foretec.com> Message-ID: <20040830093417.I62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20040826165128.0213c240@colossus.foretec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 1676547e4f33b5e63227e9c02bd359e3 Cc: Dinara Suleymanova , Rebecca Bunch , Michael Lee , tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 093efd19b5f651b2707595638f6c4003 On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Barbara B. Fuller wrote: > Please let us know if you have any questions about our in-line > comments. As I mentioned in a previous message, the Secretariat > will provide high-level requirements for the I-D submission and > posting tool sometime next week. Barbara, Thank you for prompt feedback with many useful suggestions and corrections! Below, I am going to respond only to those Secretariat comments that I cannot address in the draft without further discussion with you and TOOLs members. Please note that quite a few questions or objections seem to result from your natural desire to document and improve the current status quo, which often conflicts with my intent to define the right toolset for the job (and then bridge the gap with current IETF). This is the only strategy I know that will let us fix some current design flaws instead of unknowingly integrating them into every new tool produced. The first question should be "What toolset does IETF need?", with a "How to make a painless transition to the new toolset?" question as a followup. The primary question should not be "How to further automate what IETF and Secretariat are doing today?" because many things that you and I do in IETF today are not the things we want/should be doing in the first place. > COMMENT: If a newly submitted I-D is a Working Group submission and > version -00, then the Secretariat must obtain approval from the WG > chair before posting the document. Thus, it is impossible to post > the I-D *instantly* in such a case. Yes, indeed. However, the proposed interface makes automation possible by requiring 00 versions to be submitted (or, essentially, signed/authenticated) by the Chair. With the right authentication mechanism in place, it is possible to automate ID submission without changing IETF draft approval rules. I hope this clarifies the intent and am going to skip a few related comments that all assume that Secretariat human must interact with the Chair when the 00 version of the draft is submitted. > The "software publisher" part of the requirement implies that > submission is published or rejected without any human involvement. > > COMMENT: There does not appear to be much of a difference between > this mode and "Full Automation Mode." In both cases, the submitter > still needs to fill in all of the essential fields (i.e., the > required meta attributes). In many cases, software can do that. For example, tools like xml2rfc can "fill in" some ID metadata once they are configured. While we currently do not have consensus whether full automation is desirable, it is technically possible for the vast majority of drafts. We will discuss the desirability of full automation separately. If full automation mode is preserved, I will do my best to document it better. I agree with your comments (above and elsewhere) that the distinction with publication automation mode is not clear. > COMMENT: The matrix seems confusing. Specifically, the use of the > term "human" is not clear. Based on Section 5.3, it appears that > the "human" mode implies the use of email for that part of the > process being discussed, i.e., for either the "Submission" or > "Publication" ("Posting") of the I-D. However, in both the "Full > automation" and "Publication automation" modes, the submitter uses a > Web interface to enter information on the I-D. Therefore, it is not > clear why the "Submission" process is labeled as "software" for the > "Full automation" mode and as "human" for the "Publication > automation" mode. I was hoping that submitter definition in Section 4 would clarify the difference between "human submitter using tools" and "software submitter using implicit/prior human authorization": Submitter: A human or software submitting an Internet Draft for publication. A human submitter is likely to use some automation tools (e.g., an e-mail client), but differs from the software submitter in that it is a human who explicitly initiates the submission process and interprets submission results. I am guessing the above is too obscure to have a desired effect on a reader. I will try to emphasize the "explicitly initiates" bit to clarify the difference. As an example, consider a script that publishes current version of the draft every Sunday at midnight. A human created and started the script, but each submission is not explicitly initiated by a human. It is also not closely monitored or controlled by a human... The differences between human and software interfaces are very important. As a simple example, you cannot add an "Are you sure?" question to a fully automated interface without changing software submitters. You can add many questions to a human-driven interface. > COMMENT: ... If the TOOLS Team feels that authentication mechanisms > are appropriate (i.e., based on input from the community), then the > Team should probably obtain approval from the IESG before > implementing such mechanisms. It is clear to me that current IETF mechanisms already use authentication (e.g., an e-mail _from the Chair_ authorizing 00 draft). It's just that authentication is very weak. Mandatory strong authentication for all IETFers is beyond TOOLs scope. Stronger authentication for tool users is in scope, IMO. Finally, we are not going to implement anything so there will be a chance for IESG and IETF to review final recommendations and specifications before any implementation or adoption starts. BTW, since IESG is watching our deliberations, I am sure they will try to stop us if we cross the authentication scope line. Again, thanks a lot for your review. I am looking forward to more Secretariat requirements and feedback! Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 12:57:25 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA08290; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:57:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1pV2-00005Z-Kp; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:59:20 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1pNf-0006dj-Vs; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:51:43 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1pHU-00059P-Ub for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:45:21 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA07512 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:45:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1pJI-0008He-QZ for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:47:13 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7UGj79d066775; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:45:07 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7UGj7su066774; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:45:07 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:45:07 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? In-Reply-To: <0I3600LUJ364TZ@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: <20040830103309.U62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <0I3600LUJ364TZ@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 21c69d3cfc2dd19218717dbe1d974352 On Sat, 28 Aug 2004, Larry Masinter wrote: > We may need to require registration for those participants for > which authentication is necessary. I think this the right approach, except I would sate, more precisely: require authentication for those actions for which authentication is necessary Note that this would be no different than the current status quo! The difference would be in details on how to make authentication strong and both human- and software-friendly. > Mailing list participants do not require authentication only because > there is a simple check on bogus postings: mailing lists that only > allow members to post have the insurance that the purported author > will get a copy, and can detect forgeries. The above is a very weak check, of course. I usually do not read list posts that my mail reader marks as "from self", and if I post few messages a day, I would not notice that I made "extra" postings. > (There are some lists that are getting virus-spam that seems > to be from mailing list members, though; if this becomes > a more serious problem, we may start to want authentication, > and thus registration, even for mailing list participants.) It is already a serious problem, IMO. A lot of human hours are spent by mail list administrators on detecting non-spam in spam staging areas. As a result, administrators resort to automated measures that work poorly. I personally was silently dropped from a WG mailing list, with my postings not visible to mailing list members and vice versa, due to such poor automation. IIRC, it took me more than a week to detect that something is not right, and I "missed" a couple of important discussions. Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 13:11:16 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA09476; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:11:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1piR-0000P5-JY; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:13:11 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1pTZ-0007fW-9m; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:57:49 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1pQh-0007H0-GV for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:54:51 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA08100 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:54:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1pST-0008Tu-Fu for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:56:42 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7UGsf9d067192; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:54:41 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7UGsfJb067191; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:54:41 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:54:41 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? In-Reply-To: <0I3800FHP3CJJD@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: <20040830104510.W62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <0I3800FHP3CJJD@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464 On Sun, 29 Aug 2004, Larry Masinter wrote: > Rather than making authentication by one mechanism or another a > requirement, leave it an option, and make it visible. I do not like that approach because it effectively makes authentication useless. If anybody can post my draft, and most readers would not care to check the "authenticated" flag on the posted draft, then authenticating myself is of little or no value. As an extreme example, consider a simple script that posts a rogue draft text right after an authenticated author posts a new revision. Authenticated posting would not be even visible for virtually all readers. > Readers may want to take measures to validate the origin of drafts > for which authorship is uncertain. by asking the draft author using unauthenticated address in the draft? IMO, the only serious problem with author authentication is anonymity. Anonymous drafts are rare and can use the exceptional human-to-human mode that, by definition, does not require authentication. Do you see any other problems with requiring submitters to authenticate themselves? Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 13:21:30 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA10318; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:21:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1psI-0000eC-72; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:23:25 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1phr-0001jd-7i; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:12:35 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1pcU-0000UK-PA for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:07:02 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA09148 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:06:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1peI-0000IW-SD for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:08:55 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7UH5k9d067623; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:05:46 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7UH5jLj067622; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:05:45 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:05:45 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 On Sat, 28 Aug 2004, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: > We should make sure the system mostly works without requiring that > identity to be linked to a person - unless we have to. Agreed. Legal issues aside, multiple identities for a single person, a single identity for multiple persons, and even software-managed identity without specific human association should be allowed in principle. However, besides legal issues, the difficulty would be in surviving a malicious attack polluting IETF repositories with millions of authenticated but bogus drafts. If and as soon as we remove rate-limiting Secretariat from the loop, we have to be ready for this kind of abuse. Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 13:29:45 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA10942; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:29:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1q0I-0000qW-6T; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:31:41 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1ptz-00040g-Rw; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:25:07 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1pqU-0003J3-E7 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:21:30 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA10313 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:21:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1psG-0000e4-H3 for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:23:22 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7UHKB9d068258; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:20:11 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7UHKB2Z068257; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:20:11 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:20:11 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand Subject: Re: [Tools-team] do we need a framework? In-Reply-To: <971690C5AB73847D40FBB922@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> Message-ID: <20040830110718.E62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <4131CAAA.6050805@levkowetz.com> <971690C5AB73847D40FBB922@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3 On Sun, 29 Aug 2004, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: > I don't think we actually need to be able to PROVE identity. But we > do need to be able to do some kind of "did you submit this?" check > if the issue ever comes up. I am not sure I follow. If we cannot prove submitter identity (to a required degree of proof) when the draft is posted, then we cannot implement a post-factum "did you submit this?" check. A malicious submitter would just say "no, I did not; give me my company IP back!". We have to rely on information logged during the submission (which may require several iterations and essentially means proving identity). AFAIK, electronic signatures are starting to gain legal acceptance so we may have good luck with using modern authentication methods. We can also discuss recommending "now respond with this key to complete your post" e-mail interface as an alternative (it will verify temporary control of submitter's e-mail address). Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 13:56:58 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA13073; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:56:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1qQe-0001TC-6h; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:58:52 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1qGO-0007zz-PY; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:48:16 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1qDk-0007Jh-8g for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:45:32 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA12417 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:45:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av1-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net ([81.228.11.107]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1qFV-0001D9-QM for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:47:25 -0400 Received: by av1-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 58A6437E7F; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:44:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.164]) by av1-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46F6F37E43 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:44:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 395B837E4D for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:44:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C1qDB-00021Y-1g for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:44:57 +0200 Message-ID: <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:44:55 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Macintosh/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> In-Reply-To: <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9466e0365fc95844abaf7c3f15a05c7d Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thinking out loud, what about something like the following: Posting of workgroup -00 drafts require chair approval. Chairs are already registered somewhere with an email address. An approval request could be automatically sent to the registered chair address, with an enclosed cookie, and approval would be as simple as the chair replying to the request. The chair's approval would be registered as an approval for any of the e-mail addresses given for authors in the -00 draft to submit later revisions. Adding a new author/editor/submitter would requre a repeat of the chair approval step. Any post-00 submission would require authorisation from the submitter e-mail address, by sending a mail containing a cookie to the submitter and having the submitter reply to that email, in analogy with the chair approval mechanism above. In order to limit malicious automated submissions, rate limit the submissions to a rate of e.g. 7 submissions per 1-week sliding window. Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 14:02:18 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA13543; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:02:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1qVo-0001ed-06; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:04:12 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1qT7-0002AS-Hd; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:01:25 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1qMr-0000TH-VF for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:54:58 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA12883 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:54:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1qOf-0001Q5-Bf for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:56:50 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7UHsq9d069754; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:54:52 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7UHsqD2069753; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:54:52 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 11:54:51 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Larry Masinter Subject: Re: [Tools-team] comments on Submissions Interface tools draft In-Reply-To: <0I3600LIL2U1TZ@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: <20040830113048.S62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <0I3600LIL2U1TZ@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d0bdc596f8dd1c226c458f0b4df27a88 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0fa76816851382eb71b0a882ccdc29ac Larry, Thanks a lot for the comments! I will do my best to accommodate most of them, but I would lile to discuss a few specific issues below. On Sat, 28 Aug 2004, Larry Masinter wrote: > Anybody and anything can submit a draft for publication. There is no > reliable authentication mechanism. Initial submissions of WG drafts > require WG Chair approval, which is as easy to fake as the submission > request itself. > > While email comes from anywhere, the I-D submission email address > can distinguish spam from actual submissions, and the fact that > there is a person in the loop discourages fraud. Similarly, may not > be so easy to 'fake' WG chair approval, because the checking for WG > chair approval isn't automated -- a person actually reads it and > decides, based on the message content, that it comes from the WG > chair. I agree with you, but I also believe the above quoted text accurately represents the reality. That is, what you are saying does not seem to contradict the text. A "person in the loop discourages fraud", but "anybody and anything can submit a draft for publication". It "may not be so easy to 'fake' WG chair approval", but WG Chair approval is "as easy to fake as the submission request itself." My intent here is to document the authentication mechanism currently in place so that our proposals can be compared to what is being used right now. We need to know whether we are improving the situation with the new toolset. > In any case, I would put these paragraphs in another section, > labeled "analysis of current state" rather than under "Status Quo". Let me take one more shot at it, please. I will remove the "easy" adjective/bias since the rest of the paragraph seems to be stating facts rather than providing analysis. I will revise the other paragraphs accordingly for the next version as well. If you still think they are biased, we will then decide whether to move, relabel, or delete them. > I'd like a section on "wish list items": things that > would be nice, even if they're not requirements. Those are SHOULDs and MAYs in the current scheme of things. A separate section would be awkward because it would lack the current per-mode and other classifications of requirements. I am sure there are many good features not mentioned in the draft. If you have a wish list item not currently in the draft, please post and let's discuss whether it is worth mentioning explicitly. > I would include in this the ability to accept and to have posted the > XML version of Internet Drafts. This is something that's hard to do > with the manual process currently but would become easier if the > process were automated. I was going to put something like "accept all draft formats approved by IETF", thinking that what formats to accept is beyond this draft scope. My understanding is that RFC Editor already accepts XML sources (but not as a primary format?). IMO, we should discuss XML acceptance separately, as there are many problems with it. For example, most authors are not using RFC 2629 since xml2rfc supports more than just RFC 2629 and xml2rfc support/output varies from version to version... Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 14:08:53 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA13870; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:08:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1qcB-0001lk-53; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:10:48 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1qZV-0003Fl-DE; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:08:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1qVF-0002X3-OO for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:03:37 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA13594 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:03:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1qX3-0001gX-Eu for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:05:30 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7UI3Z9d071593 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:03:35 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7UI3ZQ6071592; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:03:35 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:03:35 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: tools-team@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> Message-ID: <20040830102919.L62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 Subject: [Tools-team] Software ID submitters X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22 Do we want to require support for software ID submitters? It is a SHOULD-level requirement in the current draft. I included the requirement because I think the draft repository should reflect the current state of the draft. Being non-archival work-in-progress and the only IETF repository for current WG work, it is not suitable for "stable views" or "review outside of the WG" snapshots. Thus, ideally, it must be no more stale than public branch of author's CVS tree. It must be come a mirror of authors public work, with no ongoing effort on author's part. IETF may need to invent "WG snapshots" and other semi-stable things, but should not abuse the ID interface for that. What are your thoughts? Should I yank automated submission from the draft? Make it a MAY? Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 15:25:28 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA20149; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:25:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1roH-0003X8-1p; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:27:24 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1rhN-0000ON-KY; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:20:13 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1rcZ-0006Z9-PS for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:15:15 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA19023 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:15:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1reN-0003Ho-Bf for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:17:09 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7UJFA9d074676; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:15:10 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7UJFAjq074675; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:15:10 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:15:10 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication In-Reply-To: <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> Message-ID: <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 244a2fd369eaf00ce6820a760a3de2e8 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 41c17b4b16d1eedaa8395c26e9a251c4 On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > Thinking out loud, what about something like the following: First of all, I hope we can have a generic authentication mechanism for major IETF actions rather than several specific per-action authentication mechanisms. If there is consensus about that, we should keep the general applicability in mind when deciding on specific authentication procedures for a given action, such as draft submission. For example, there could be a generic "can somebody read Actor's e-mail and confirm?" authentication procedure (with features like "verify only once in a while", "verify always", "use alternate address", etc.). We can compare that with other procedures like the use of PGL signatures. > Posting of workgroup -00 drafts require chair approval. Chairs are > already registered somewhere with an email address. An approval > request could be automatically sent to the registered chair address, > with an enclosed cookie, and approval would be as simple as the > chair replying to the request. > > The chair's approval would be registered as an approval for any of > the e-mail addresses given for authors in the -00 draft to submit > later revisions. Adding a new author/editor/submitter would requre > a repeat of the chair approval step. Why not let the Chair submit any WG draft (as currently required for the -00 draft in the ID submission draft)? Why introduce a separate approval step/stage? With two steps, we have more things to worry about. For example, do we wait for chairs approval or does the system solicit Chair approval based on draft WG name? If we wait, do we remind the chairs anyway? How long do we wait? What if Chair's approval comes in before the draft? Can the Chair dis-approve? What if one Chair dis-approves and the other approves; would that depend on the order of chair e-mails? Etc. etc. > Any post-00 submission would require authorisation from the > submitter e-mail address, by sending a mail containing a cookie to > the submitter and having the submitter reply to that email, in > analogy with the chair approval mechanism above. If we let the Chair post any WG draft, we also solve the problem of a WG draft N+1st revision needed to be posted in the absence of original author(s). > In order to limit malicious automated submissions, rate limit the > submissions to a rate of e.g. 7 submissions per 1-week sliding > window. This is a separate question, I guess. If rate-limiting is the solution, we should be careful to limit based on the right sample. Malicious automated submissions can create malicious automated e-mail addresses so limiting using "per address" approach seems insufficient. (I would also think that 7 is way too low, but that is an even less important question for now). Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 15:39:54 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA20977; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:39:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1s2H-0003qX-Oe; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:41:50 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1rx1-0008Gv-Qe; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:36:23 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1ruZ-00072m-BG for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:33:51 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA20613 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:33:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av9-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net ([81.228.11.115]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1rwN-0003iy-Ln for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:35:45 -0400 Received: by av9-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 3AC7237E97; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:33:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.164]) by av9-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 265F937E94; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:33:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F408437E57; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:33:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C1ru8-0003we-00; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:33:24 +0200 Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:33:24 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication Message-Id: <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7fa173a723009a6ca8ce575a65a5d813 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 37af5f8fbf6f013c5b771388e24b09e7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alex, On Monday, 30 Aug 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote: > > On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > > > Thinking out loud, what about something like the following: > > First of all, I hope we can have a generic authentication mechanism > for major IETF actions rather than several specific per-action > authentication mechanisms. If there is consensus about that, we should > keep the general applicability in mind when deciding on specific > authentication procedures for a given action, such as draft > submission. Agreed. > For example, there could be a generic "can somebody read Actor's > e-mail and confirm?" authentication procedure (with features like > "verify only once in a while", "verify always", "use alternate > address", etc.). We can compare that with other procedures like the > use of PGL signatures. Good thinking. > > Posting of workgroup -00 drafts require chair approval. Chairs are > > already registered somewhere with an email address. An approval > > request could be automatically sent to the registered chair address, > > with an enclosed cookie, and approval would be as simple as the > > chair replying to the request. > > > > The chair's approval would be registered as an approval for any of > > the e-mail addresses given for authors in the -00 draft to submit > > later revisions. Adding a new author/editor/submitter would requre > > a repeat of the chair approval step. > > Why not let the Chair submit any WG draft (as currently required for > the -00 draft in the ID submission draft)? Why introduce a separate > approval step/stage? Mmm, the above *is* my view of the current process - the author submits and the secretariat queries the chair. Additionally, it saves the chairs from having to do the sumbission work, and the procedure looks the same in all cases for the submitter. > With two steps, we have more things to worry about. For example, do we > wait for chairs approval or does the system solicit Chair approval > based on draft WG name? Solicit, clearly (in my mind) > If we wait, do we remind the chairs anyway? > How long do we wait? The generic confirm by email procedure would have to have a timeout, anyway, I think. Don't think this is special. > What if Chair's approval comes in before the > draft? Won't work, needs the cookie. > Can the Chair dis-approve? What if one Chair dis-approves and > the other approves; would that depend on the order of chair e-mails? > Etc. etc. Simplest is to just let the action time out if no approval is received. It should be an edge case, and the chair should communicate with an author who's submitted due to a misunderstanding anyway. If one chair has approved the submission, that's it. > > Any post-00 submission would require authorisation from the > > submitter e-mail address, by sending a mail containing a cookie to > > the submitter and having the submitter reply to that email, in > > analogy with the chair approval mechanism above. > > If we let the Chair post any WG draft, we also solve the problem of a > WG draft N+1st revision needed to be posted in the absence of original > author(s). Yes. But as a Chair I'd definitely push back on having to post every draft for my workgroup. And we'd be creating work for the Chairs at the same time we'd be removing it from the secretariat. Not a win-win situation, I think. > > In order to limit malicious automated submissions, rate limit the > > submissions to a rate of e.g. 7 submissions per 1-week sliding > > window. > > This is a separate question, I guess. If rate-limiting is the > solution, we should be careful to limit based on the right sample. > Malicious automated submissions can create malicious automated e-mail > addresses so limiting using "per address" approach seems insufficient. > (I would also think that 7 is way too low, but that is an even less > important question for now). Separate question, yes. As for creating new addresses, that wouldn't work for -xx versions if only the addresses in the original approved -00 could submit. For -00 versions it could still be a problem, but it would be limited to a spate of "spam" mails to the chairs if we used the method I mentioned in my first paragraph of the original posting, + storage on the server. Don't know if we need to worry too much about this - it might never become a problem... Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 17:13:00 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA02932; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:13:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1tUM-0008AF-Vn; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:14:57 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tBp-0003AZ-9z; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:55:45 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1sJz-00026n-V0 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:00:08 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA21890 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:00:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av5-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net ([81.228.11.111]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1sLo-0004Ji-9m for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:02:02 -0400 Received: by av5-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 402B937F0A; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:59:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.164]) by av5-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F0CF37ED4; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:59:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F2BC37E48; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:59:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C1sJY-00043s-00; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:59:40 +0200 Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:59:40 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Software ID submitters Message-Id: <20040830215940.67d57b9f@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <20040830102919.L62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830102919.L62186@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7baded97d9887f7a0c7e8a33c2e3ea1b Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alex, On Monday, 30 Aug 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote: > > Do we want to require support for software ID submitters? It is a > SHOULD-level requirement in the current draft. > > I included the requirement because I think the draft repository should > > reflect the current state of the draft. Being non-archival > work-in-progress and the only IETF repository for current WG work, it > is not suitable for "stable views" or "review outside of the WG" > snapshots. Thus, ideally, it must be no more stale than public branch > of author's CVS tree. It must be come a mirror of authors public work, > > with no ongoing effort on author's part. I think that this changes the nature of the ID-repository too much in a direction I'm not sure is beneficial. > IETF may need to invent "WG snapshots" and other semi-stable things, > but should not abuse the ID interface for that. I'd much prefer to invent a different repository for the rapidly changing reflection of the editor's work, possibly patterned closely after cvs / svn. This could for instance be part of a workgroup support toolset. Possibly I'm biased because that's similar to the way I've handled e.g. the EAP 2284bis draft I worked on not too long ago... http://ietf.levkowetz.com/drafts/eap/rfc2284bis/ > What are your thoughts? Should I yank automated submission from the > draft? Make it a MAY? I'd comment it out for now - there's the additional issue of always being able to say that a person did the submission and is responsible for the IPR assurances given in the document. Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 17:13:15 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA02988; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:13:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1tUe-0008BT-PL; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:15:13 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tCA-0003K5-IL; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:56:06 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1sRe-0006Ai-Ec for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:08:02 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA22471 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:08:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av5-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net ([81.228.9.113]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1sTS-0004VY-NX for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:09:56 -0400 Received: by av5-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id D1E5837EC1; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:07:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.178]) by av5-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C180237E46 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:07:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A93D43801B for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:07:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C1sRB-00045S-00 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:07:33 +0200 Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:07:33 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: tools-team@ietf.org Message-Id: <20040830220733.5fe217c0@chardonnay> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 082a9cbf4d599f360ac7f815372a6a15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Tools-team] Some input on the I-D publication process (Was: Fw: Diff between IETF drafts) X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: c0bedb65cce30976f0bf60a0a39edea4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I got this (below) from Harald. Should we consider making diff-generation a part of the I-D publication process? I've seen automatic diff generation as potentially part of a workgroup toolset, but maybe that is not the best way to see it? Henrik -------- Begin forwarded message: -------- Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:39:09 +0200 From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand To: Benoit Claise Cc: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: Diff between IETF drafts Benoit, thanks for the tip! Henrik - the tools team should take this as input to the discussion of the I-D publication process! Harald --On 30. august 2004 14:13 +0200 Benoit Claise wrote: > > Hi Harald, > > Some food for thoughts... > > I've always been thinking the drafts review process in the IETF is not > quite efficient, as we have to trust the editor summary email (if any) > for all the changes applied to the new draft version ... which most of > the time implies reading the entire draft... which causes delay in the > review... > So, as an editor, I've started to include the a "diff" file between the > two previous versions, based on htmlwdiff. Until someone refers me to > this web site, administered by Henrik Levkowetz: diffs between draft > revisions are automatically created on > http://ietf.levkowetz.com/drafts/ipfix/ every time a new revision of an > IPFIX working group document is discovered in the official > internet-drafts directory (using the draft-ietf-ipfix- name heuristic). > > In order to speed up the IETF process, you might consider adding this > little extra step: > - either as a facility for all IETF participants (maybe a task for the WG > chairs to make it's taken care of?) > - either as part of the publication procedure by the > internet-draft@ietf.org > > Regards, Benoit. > > > _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 17:13:31 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03067; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:13:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1tUs-0008CL-VY; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:15:28 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tCh-0003Z4-7r; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:56:39 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1sVw-000053-FU for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:12:28 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA23191 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:12:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1sXk-0004oO-SQ for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:14:22 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7UKCM9d077340; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:12:22 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7UKCMmJ077339; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:12:22 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:12:22 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication In-Reply-To: <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> Message-ID: <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d2b46e3b2dfbff2088e0b72a54104985 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 03169bfe4792634a390035a01a6c6d2f On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: >>> Posting of workgroup -00 drafts require chair approval. Chairs >>> are already registered somewhere with an email address. An >>> approval request could be automatically sent to the registered >>> chair address, with an enclosed cookie, and approval would be as >>> simple as the chair replying to the request. >>> >>> The chair's approval would be registered as an approval for any of >>> the e-mail addresses given for authors in the -00 draft to submit >>> later revisions. Adding a new author/editor/submitter would >>> requre a repeat of the chair approval step. >> >> Why not let the Chair submit any WG draft (as currently required >> for the -00 draft in the ID submission draft)? Why introduce a >> separate approval step/stage? > > Mmm, the above *is* my view of the current process - the author > submits and the secretariat queries the chair. I was referring to the current requirements in draft-ietf-tools-draft-submission draft, not current IETF requirements. Sorry for being unclear. Recall that we should compare our solutions with known ideals, not just with current practice as the latter is often broken. > Additionally, it saves the chairs from having to do the sumbission > work, True, but there are two sides of a coin here. If we think it is a lot of work to submit 00, then, by implication, there are a lot of non-obvious options to specify. Then, it may be a good idea to let the Chair do it, as the Chair May Know Better (TM). On the other hand, if submitting a 00 draft is trivial, then we are not adding that much more work for the Chair (especially since the Chair would still have to do something to approve the submission in the other scheme). This is unlikely to be an important performance optimization given the number of 00 versions of WG drafts per year each chair would have to submit. Thus, we are talking primarily about a clean functional interface here. > and the procedure looks the same in all cases for the submitter. Not exactly, with chair-approves-00, the submitter has to wait/expect chair approval to check the submission as "done". While the system may do all the legwork, the human submitter still has to know about approval and verify that everything went smoothly. The advantage of the chair-approves-00 scheme is that there is no special approval step to worry about and any submitter faces the same interface, the same sequence of actions. >> With two steps, we have more things to worry about. For example, do >> we wait for chairs approval or does the system solicit Chair >> approval based on draft WG name? > > Solicit, clearly (in my mind) OK. Then we have to deal with bypassing Chair's spam filters and with scripts spamming Chairs by submitting bogus 00 drafts (intentionally or as a result of some runaway automation). >> If we wait, do we remind the chairs anyway? How long do we wait? > > The generic confirm by email procedure would have to have a timeout, > anyway, I think. Don't think this is special. It is special because you will need to document two timeouts (at least): timeout to verify e-mail control and approval timeout. These timeouts might have the same value (most likely NOT!), but they are different states in the state machine. >> Can the Chair dis-approve? What if one Chair dis-approves and the >> other approves; would that depend on the order of chair e-mails? >> Etc. etc. > > Simplest is to just let the action time out if no approval is > received. It should be an edge case, and the chair should > communicate with an author who's submitted due to a misunderstanding > anyway. If one chair has approved the submission, that's it. Sure. I am not saying there are no solutions, especially if submitters can tolerate long timeouts without knowing what is going on (Did my chair forget? Is he on vacation? Was the approval request caught in his spam filter? Does he not want me to publish? Is he thinking the other Chair will approve? ...). I am saying that there are many more problems we need to solve if we add more state. Some of the problems are trivial, but why complicate the interface? Is it really that much more difficult for the Chair to submit a pre-packaged 00 draft or even just meta-information? >>> Any post-00 submission would require authorisation from the >>> submitter e-mail address, by sending a mail containing a cookie to >>> the submitter and having the submitter reply to that email, in >>> analogy with the chair approval mechanism above. >> >> If we let the Chair post any WG draft, we also solve the problem of >> a WG draft N+1st revision needed to be posted in the absence of >> original author(s). > > Yes. But as a Chair I'd definitely push back on having to post > every draft for my workgroup. And we'd be creating work for the > Chairs at the same time we'd be removing it from the secretariat. > Not a win-win situation, I think. Not every draft. Just the 00 version of the draft. How many 00 drafts does a typical group have in a year? I do not think comparing with Secretariat overheads is accurate because we are removing humans from the publication loop (for all drafts). We are not increasing the number of human submitters. In fact, we are decreasing the number of humans involved with the chairs-submit-00 scheme (only sightly, again, we are talking about a dozen or so 00 drafts per year for a typical WG; all other drafts are not required to be submitted by a Chair!). >>> In order to limit malicious automated submissions, rate limit the >>> submissions to a rate of e.g. 7 submissions per 1-week sliding >>> window. >> >> This is a separate question, I guess. If rate-limiting is the >> solution, we should be careful to limit based on the right sample. >> Malicious automated submissions can create malicious automated >> e-mail addresses so limiting using "per address" approach seems >> insufficient. (I would also think that 7 is way too low, but that >> is an even less important question for now). > > Separate question, yes. As for creating new addresses, that > wouldn't work for -xx versions if only the addresses in the original > approved -00 could submit. For -00 versions it could still be a > problem, but it would be limited to a spate of "spam" mails to the > chairs if we used the method I mentioned in my first paragraph of > the original posting, + storage on the server. Don't know if we > need to worry too much about this - it might never become a > problem... You may be forgetting about non-WG drafts that do not require Chair approval to be posted but can consume a lot of IETF resources and attention... At any rate, while I agree that automated abuse is unlikely to become a problem, I still think we should at the very least document our refusal to solve it (if that's the team consensus). Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 17:17:23 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03568; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:17:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1tYe-0008LS-S3; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:19:21 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tMz-0006ZB-CV; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:07:17 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1snB-0002qv-JO for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:30:17 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA26496 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:30:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1soz-0005vU-C4 for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:32:11 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7UKUB9d078046; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:30:11 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7UKUBgn078045; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:30:11 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:30:11 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Software ID submitters In-Reply-To: <20040830215940.67d57b9f@chardonnay> Message-ID: <20040830141430.A62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830102919.L62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830215940.67d57b9f@chardonnay> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: c1c65599517f9ac32519d043c37c5336 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4d87d2aa806f79fed918a62e834505ca On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > I'd much prefer to invent a different repository for the rapidly > changing reflection of the editor's work, possibly patterned closely > after cvs / svn. Interesting! The "WG snapshot" ideas discussed elsewhere in IETF try to create "more stable IDs"; your idea would create "less stable IDs". Both are out of this WG scope, but I find the symmetry interesting. > This could for instance be part of a workgroup support toolset. > Possibly I'm biased because that's similar to the way I've handled > e.g. the EAP 2284bis draft I worked on not too long ago... > http://ietf.levkowetz.com/drafts/eap/rfc2284bis/ Yes, many WGs have pages like that (usually not that pretty or advanced). To me, it was always an indication of inappropriate IETF publication mechanisms. What you are saying, essentially, that IETF IDs carry some perceived "stability" with them, even though all IETF documents deny them any such qualities. Not unlike the situation with RFCs, I guess! Personally, I would prefer to have "unstable drafts" plus "stable snapshots" then a 3-way scheme of "unstable drafts", "semi-stable drafts", and "stable snapshots", but I see your point. It is just difficult for me to define "semi-stable drafts" category (but I can define the other two). >> What are your thoughts? Should I yank automated submission from the >> draft? Make it a MAY? > > I'd comment it out for now - Noted. Any other opinions? > there's the additional issue of always being able to say that a > person did the submission and is responsible for the IPR assurances > given in the document. Given the fact that tools like xml2rfc _generate_ IPR assurances (sometimes introducing modifications to them), I find claims that humans must explicitly submit drafts due to IPR issues rather weak or, at least, out of scope. The submitter must assure, but it should be OK to assure via automated means if the submitter explicitly consents to using such means. See W3C mailing list archival policy as an example. Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 17:17:30 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03592; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:17:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1tYl-0008Li-4v; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:19:27 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tND-0006z4-Vw; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:07:32 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1srC-000590-Ho for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:34:27 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA27347 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:34:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av1-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.116]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1ssy-0006AL-Qt for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:36:20 -0400 Received: by av1-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 3CE8937E62; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:33:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.183]) by av1-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B52137E46; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:33:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0217637E5C; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:33:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C1sqi-0004E0-00; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:33:56 +0200 Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:33:56 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication Message-Id: <20040830223356.3e908a5a@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 20f22c03b5c66958bff5ef54fcda6e48 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 156eddb66af16eef49a76ae923b15b92 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alex, On Monday, 30 Aug 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote: > On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: ... > > Mmm, the above *is* my view of the current process - the author > > submits and the secretariat queries the chair. > > I was referring to the current requirements in > draft-ietf-tools-draft-submission draft, not current IETF > requirements. Sorry for being unclear. Recall that we should compare > our solutions with known ideals, not just with current practice as the > latter is often broken. Ah. But i don't agree it's ideal for the submitter to send the draft to the chair, who has to enter it :-) > > Additionally, it saves the chairs from having to do the sumbission > > work, > > True, but there are two sides of a coin here. If we think it is a lot > of work to submit 00, then, by implication, there are a lot of > non-obvious options to specify. Then, it may be a good idea to let the > Chair do it, as the Chair May Know Better (TM). On the other hand, if > submitting a 00 draft is trivial, then we are not adding that much > more work for the Chair (especially since the Chair would still have > to do something to approve the submission in the other scheme). Yes, but that could be as simple as responding to an email - as is the case today - and additionally, it works as a notification to the chair that the draft has been sumbitted. > This is unlikely to be an important performance optimization given the > number of 00 versions of WG drafts per year each chair would have to > submit. Thus, we are talking primarily about a clean functional > interface here. Maybe not an optimization, but it would certainly be an annoyance having to do the submission work in addition to the various nudging and followup work. I'd not be happy about that. > > and the procedure looks the same in all cases for the submitter. > > Not exactly, with chair-approves-00, the submitter has to wait/expect > chair approval to check the submission as "done". While the system may > do all the legwork, the human submitter still has to know about > approval and verify that everything went smoothly. True. But the submitter always submits using the same interface - with your alternative, the -00 submission has to be done by email to the chair, and then the chair has to use the sumbission tool. If the sumbission fails ( for instance because of boilerplate errors ) the chair has to manually feed that information back to the sumbitter. I wouldn't be happy about that... > The advantage of the chair-approves-00 scheme is that there is no > special approval step to worry about and any submitter faces the same > interface, the same sequence of actions. No, the -00 author has to know about a different way - by mail to the Chair. > >> With two steps, we have more things to worry about. For example, do > >> we wait for chairs approval or does the system solicit Chair > >> approval based on draft WG name? > > > > Solicit, clearly (in my mind) > > OK. Then we have to deal with bypassing Chair's spam filters and with > scripts spamming Chairs by submitting bogus 00 drafts (intentionally > or as a result of some runaway automation). Yes, but that's not different from the case for any mailing list subscription, or for any draft the chair may submit as author. > >> If we wait, do we remind the chairs anyway? How long do we wait? > > > > The generic confirm by email procedure would have to have a timeout, > > anyway, I think. Don't think this is special. > > It is special because you will need to document two timeouts (at > least): timeout to verify e-mail control and approval timeout. These > timeouts might have the same value (most likely NOT!), but they are > different states in the state machine. Yes, but if we have a generic mechanism, we surely don't expect to deploy it with the same parameters in every instance?? > >> Can the Chair dis-approve? What if one Chair dis-approves and the > >> other approves; would that depend on the order of chair e-mails? > >> Etc. etc. > > > > Simplest is to just let the action time out if no approval is > > received. It should be an edge case, and the chair should > > communicate with an author who's submitted due to a misunderstanding > > anyway. If one chair has approved the submission, that's it. > > Sure. I am not saying there are no solutions, especially if submitters > can tolerate long timeouts without knowing what is going on (Did my > chair forget? Is he on vacation? Was the approval request caught in > his spam filter? Does he not want me to publish? Is he thinking the > other Chair will approve? ...). > > I am saying that there are many more problems we need to solve if we > add more state. Some of the problems are trivial, but why complicate > the interface? Is it really that much more difficult for the Chair to > submit a pre-packaged 00 draft or even just meta-information? Actually, having the chair do the sumbission may simplify the tool, but make life harder on both chairs and -00 submitters, which is the wrong way around. > >>> Any post-00 submission would require authorisation from the > >>> submitter e-mail address, by sending a mail containing a cookie to > >>> the submitter and having the submitter reply to that email, in > >>> analogy with the chair approval mechanism above. > >> > >> If we let the Chair post any WG draft, we also solve the problem of > >> a WG draft N+1st revision needed to be posted in the absence of > >> original author(s). > > > > Yes. But as a Chair I'd definitely push back on having to post > > every draft for my workgroup. And we'd be creating work for the > > Chairs at the same time we'd be removing it from the secretariat. > > Not a win-win situation, I think. > > Not every draft. Sorry, I understood your paragraph above as proposing that. If you didn't mean that, disregard my comment. > Just the 00 version of the draft. How many 00 drafts > does a typical group have in a year? I do not think comparing with > Secretariat overheads is accurate because we are removing humans from > the publication loop (for all drafts). We are not increasing the > number of human submitters. In fact, we are decreasing the number of > humans involved with the chairs-submit-00 scheme (only sightly, again, > we are talking about a dozen or so 00 drafts per year for a typical > WG; all other drafts are not required to be submitted by a Chair!). ... > > Separate question, yes. As for creating new addresses, that > > wouldn't work for -xx versions if only the addresses in the original > > approved -00 could submit. For -00 versions it could still be a > > problem, but it would be limited to a spate of "spam" mails to the > > chairs if we used the method I mentioned in my first paragraph of > > the original posting, + storage on the server. Don't know if we > > need to worry too much about this - it might never become a > > problem... > > You may be forgetting about non-WG drafts that do not require Chair > approval to be posted but can consume a lot of IETF resources and > attention... Ah, yes. Quite right. > At any rate, while I agree that automated abuse is unlikely to become > a problem, I still think we should at the very least document our > refusal to solve it (if that's the team consensus). Quite so, I agree (whichever way we go) Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 17:25:21 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA04335; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:25:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1tgI-00009G-TS; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:27:19 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tRa-0001Oj-T2; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:12:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1t1Z-0007hm-3k for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:45:09 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA28673 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:45:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av9-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net ([81.228.11.116]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1t3N-0006dh-UH for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:47:03 -0400 Received: by av9-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 1951337ECD; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:44:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.164]) by av9-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0866637E42; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:44:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E646C37E60; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:44:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C1t18-0004GU-00; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:44:42 +0200 Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:44:42 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Software ID submitters Message-Id: <20040830224442.6150c126@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <20040830141430.A62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830102919.L62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830215940.67d57b9f@chardonnay> <20040830141430.A62186@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4b800b1eab964a31702fa68f1ff0e955 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d8ae4fd88fcaf47c1a71c804d04f413d Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alex, On Monday, 30 Aug 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote: > On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > > > I'd much prefer to invent a different repository for the rapidly > > changing reflection of the editor's work, possibly patterned closely > > after cvs / svn. > > Interesting! The "WG snapshot" ideas discussed elsewhere in IETF try > to create "more stable IDs"; your idea would create "less stable IDs". > Both are out of this WG scope, but I find the symmetry interesting. Not quite sure the latter is out of our scope :-) I'd see it like this: Having to start out with *one* mechanism, we have the current draft publication as it is used today. This is a compromise between a number of different needs. We are now considering refinements which will better cater to some needs than what the current mechanism does - one need has been more stable ID's - another has been insight into the editor work. So the "WG snapshot" is aiming at improving one aspect, while capturing rapid updates is a very different need. > > This could for instance be part of a workgroup support toolset. > > Possibly I'm biased because that's similar to the way I've handled > > e.g. the EAP 2284bis draft I worked on not too long ago... > > http://ietf.levkowetz.com/drafts/eap/rfc2284bis/ > > Yes, many WGs have pages like that (usually not that pretty or > advanced). To me, it was always an indication of inappropriate IETF > publication mechanisms. What you are saying, essentially, that IETF > IDs carry some perceived "stability" with them, even though all IETF > documents deny them any such qualities. Not unlike the situation with > RFCs, I guess! Well, they are stable enough that a workgroup can refer to them during discussions without confusion about what text is being discussed. Having a new published draft sometime multiple times per day will nearly guarantee that two or more people discussing the draft will have read different versions... > Personally, I would prefer to have "unstable drafts" plus "stable > snapshots" then a 3-way scheme of "unstable drafts", "semi-stable > drafts", and "stable snapshots", but I see your point. It is just > difficult for me to define "semi-stable drafts" category (but I can > define the other two). Umm, don't know if my comments above has improved on this? > >> What are your thoughts? Should I yank automated submission from the > >> draft? Make it a MAY? > > > > I'd comment it out for now - > > Noted. Any other opinions? > > > there's the additional issue of always being able to say that a > > person did the submission and is responsible for the IPR assurances > > given in the document. > > Given the fact that tools like xml2rfc _generate_ IPR assurances > (sometimes introducing modifications to them), I find claims that > humans must explicitly submit drafts due to IPR issues rather weak or, > at least, out of scope. The submitter must assure, but it should be OK > to assure via automated means if the submitter explicitly consents to > using such means. See W3C mailing list archival policy as an example. Umm, not sure that's good enough from a lawyer's point of view... Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 17:31:08 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA04784; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:31:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1tlu-0000JC-C1; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:33:05 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tTW-0002ew-7M; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:14:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tD5-0003mk-1i for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:57:03 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA00941 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:57:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1tEt-0007SU-Ir for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:58:57 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7UKuw9d079431; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:56:58 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7UKuwhw079430; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:56:58 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:56:58 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication In-Reply-To: <20040830223356.3e908a5a@chardonnay> Message-ID: <20040830143550.U62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830223356.3e908a5a@chardonnay> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > Ah. But i don't agree it's ideal for the submitter to send the > draft to the chair, who has to enter it :-) I do not think that's ideal either, but, given unavoidable WG-chair-author interaction in this case (due to WG consensus calls), it seems to me that uploading a file is a much smaller price than having a two-steps 00 publication interface. Note that the future WG draft is usually posted on the WG list for WG consensus call (to accept the draft). Thus, there is often no separate author-chair e-mail required. The chair makes consensus call and submits the draft. And, again, we would need that chair-can-submit-any-wg-draft interface anyway (as an exception when authors leave or not available)! Let's agree to disagree for now and wait for more opinions. I would also propose a [very] alternative solution in a separate e-mail. Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 17:33:23 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05081; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:33:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1to6-0000NC-WD; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:35:21 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tWJ-0003aS-Ba; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:16:55 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tLZ-0005Aj-1N for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:05:49 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA01509 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:05:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av1-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.115]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1tNO-0007gN-9f for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:07:43 -0400 Received: by av1-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 7F67E37E4C; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 23:05:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.183]) by av1-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E77037E45; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 23:05:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A3B937E53; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 23:05:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C1tL2-00030f-65; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 23:05:16 +0200 Message-ID: <4133968C.7040505@levkowetz.com> Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 23:05:16 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Macintosh/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830223356.3e908a5a@chardonnay> <20040830143550.U62186@measurement-factory.com> In-Reply-To: <20040830143550.U62186@measurement-factory.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++) X-Scan-Signature: e1e48a527f609d1be2bc8d8a70eb76cb Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alex Rousskov wrote: > On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > >> Ah. But i don't agree it's ideal for the submitter to send the draft >> to the chair, who has to enter it :-) > > > I do not think that's ideal either, but, given unavoidable > WG-chair-author interaction in this case (due to WG consensus calls), it > seems to me that uploading a file is a much smaller price than having a > two-steps 00 publication interface. Note that the future WG draft is > usually posted on the WG list for WG consensus call (to accept the > draft). Thus, there is often no separate author-chair e-mail required. > The chair makes consensus call and submits the draft. No, the WG normally agrees to adopt a certain version of an idividual draft; the authors then has to re-name and re-process with the new name, at a minimum, even if no other minor changes have to be made as a result of comments from the workgroup. > And, again, we would need that chair-can-submit-any-wg-draft interface > anyway (as an exception when authors leave or not available)! Yes. But that is a separate issue. > Let's agree to disagree for now and wait for more opinions. I would also > propose a [very] alternative solution in a separate e-mail. I do think the "get chair's approval by return mail" is a fairly simple thing, if we already have the "get author's approval by return mail mechanism", so I guess we'll have to continue to disagree ,:-) I look forward to seeing your alternative proposal. Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 17:41:03 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05872; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:41:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1tvX-0000dZ-Ic; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:43:00 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tkC-0007hR-MF; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:31:16 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tTf-0002nu-47 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:14:11 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03217 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:14:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1tVV-0008ET-GD for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:16:05 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7ULEA9d080142; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:14:10 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7ULE9UC080141; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:14:09 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:14:09 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: tools-team@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <20040830223356.3e908a5a@chardonnay> Message-ID: <20040830145706.D62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830223356.3e908a5a@chardonnay> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 21c69d3cfc2dd19218717dbe1d974352 Subject: [Tools-team] WG draft work authorization X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 50a516d93fd399dc60588708fd9a3002 Henrik and I spent a few cycles and failed to agree whether chair-submits-00 or author-submits-and-chair-approves-00 scheme is better. I believe the whole argument can be avoided if we look at the problem from draft _work_ authorization rather than draft _submission_ authorization point of view: What if a Chair that makes "WG draft" consensus call, could authorize corresponding WG draft work as a stand-alone action, recorded by the IETF system (without submitting any drafts)? When an author submits the corresponding WG draft (any version) the system would check for prior Chair authorization. If the authorization exists, the draft is posted. If not, the draft is rejected and the author is instructed to seek WG/Chair approval first. A slight variation: instead of the Chair recording a work approval in the "system", the Chair can generate an "approval token" (a text string) and give it to the author. The author would attach the "approval token" to all WG draft revisions she submits. IETF tools can generate tokens for Chairs, of course. There can be a black list of stolen approval tokens and tokens would expire, etc. In both variations, it would be possible to both authorize WG draft work and stop such work if the group decides to abandon the draft. It would also be possible to stop a given rogue author for submitting changes (perhaps the author was banned from group mailing list using appropriate IETF procedures). I like this scheme also because it allows us to capture some information about the WG draft work as a whole (e.g., deadlines, expected RFC status, dependencies, etc), without piggybacking exceptions to the WG draft submission interface. This can also _reduce_ work for Chairs as the interface can send appropriate e-mail message to the mailing list, declaring consensus to adopt/start a WG draft and specifying all the details (that a busy Chair might forget). What do you think? Would any of the above be better than chair-submits-00 or author-submits-and-chair-approves-00 scheme? Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 17:53:53 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA06650; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:53:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1u7y-0000vx-CM; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:55:51 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1twr-00034I-R4; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:44:21 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1tpE-0000iX-VW for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:36:29 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05395 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:36:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1tr5-0000T4-HC for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:38:23 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7ULaR9d081282; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:36:27 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7ULaRLU081281; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:36:27 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:36:27 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Some input on the I-D publication process (Was: Fw: Diff between IETF drafts) In-Reply-To: <20040830220733.5fe217c0@chardonnay> Message-ID: <20040830152445.N62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <20040830220733.5fe217c0@chardonnay> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8de5f93cb2b4e3bee75302e9eacc33db Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 1a1bf7677bfe77d8af1ebe0e91045c5b Henrik, I strongly support archiving all draft versions on IETF site. Generating diffs against any two versions (and last two versions by default) would be a simple and effective use of such an archive. I think this is out of ID submission draft scope, but hopefully within the TOOLs team scope. This probably belongs to the Documents Repository interface. Personally, I think it is silly to remove expired drafts, but if I am the only person thinking that (on the TOOLs team), we can at least recommend that draft versions are accessible until the latest version expires. While still silly (IMHO), it might gain more support from IETF than a consistent "all posted IDs are accessible at IETF" policy. If neither flies with IESG, we can at least recommend development or adoption of the draft diff generation tool. Drafts are not programs, and it is not an easy exercise today to generate a good diff! A public draft-diff tool should be recommended even if IETF provides past versions and diffs, of course. Thanks, Alex. On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > Hi, > > I got this (below) from Harald. Should we consider > making diff-generation a part of the I-D publication process? > > I've seen automatic diff generation as potentially part of a workgroup > toolset, but maybe that is not the best way to see it? > > Henrik > > -------- Begin forwarded message: -------- > > Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:39:09 +0200 > From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand > To: Benoit Claise > Cc: Henrik Levkowetz > Subject: Re: Diff between IETF drafts > > > Benoit, > > thanks for the tip! > > Henrik - the tools team should take this as input to the discussion of the > I-D publication process! > > Harald > > --On 30. august 2004 14:13 +0200 Benoit Claise wrote: > >> >> Hi Harald, >> >> Some food for thoughts... >> >> I've always been thinking the drafts review process in the IETF is not >> quite efficient, as we have to trust the editor summary email (if any) >> for all the changes applied to the new draft version ... which most of >> the time implies reading the entire draft... which causes delay in the >> review... >> So, as an editor, I've started to include the a "diff" file between the >> two previous versions, based on htmlwdiff. Until someone refers me to >> this web site, administered by Henrik Levkowetz: diffs between draft >> revisions are automatically created on >> http://ietf.levkowetz.com/drafts/ipfix/ every time a new revision of an >> IPFIX working group document is discovered in the official >> internet-drafts directory (using the draft-ietf-ipfix- name heuristic). >> >> In order to speed up the IETF process, you might consider adding this >> little extra step: >> - either as a facility for all IETF participants (maybe a task for the WG >> chairs to make it's taken care of?) >> - either as part of the publication procedure by the >> internet-draft@ietf.org >> >> Regards, Benoit. >> >> >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tools-team mailing list > Tools-team@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team > _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 22:30:00 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA24033; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:30:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1yRE-0006xo-6e; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:32:00 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1yKO-0000vX-1h; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:24:56 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1yH3-0000PC-3M for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:21:29 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA23667 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:21:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exprod6ob2.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.212] helo=psmtp.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1yIv-0006pI-4U for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:23:26 -0400 Received: from source ([192.150.22.7]) by exprod6ob2.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:21:19 PDT Received: from inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-3 [153.32.251.51]) by smtp-relay-7.sea.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7V2LINf001262; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:21:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7V2LHkq005099; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:21:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 (c-131-136.corp.adobe.com [153.32.131.136]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I3A0074AH7H66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:21:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:21:17 -0700 From: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication In-reply-to: <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> To: "'Alex Rousskov'" , "'Henrik Levkowetz'" Message-id: <0I3A0074BH7H66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcSO1jXN+x0bHg7/TgyytzjiqDV7HgAKj7Gw X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 39bd8f8cbb76cae18b7e23f7cf6b2b9f Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT I think, in general, it is a good idea if the tools do not require unnecessary serialization of multi-party protocols. In the case of submission of a -00 draft, there are two parties, the submitter (one of the listed authors of the WG draft) and the approving chair (one of the listed co-chairs of the working group). There are two actions: submitter prepares document and submits it for posting approving chair approves this event. These events should be allowed in either order: a) The approving chair can pre-approve a submitter "Person-with-email-address-XXX@YYY has my permission to submit draft draft-WGNAME-DRAFTNAME-00" b) The submitter can submit a draft "Here is draft-WGNAME-DRAFTNAME-00" If (a) happens before (b), then the draft is noted as being approved by the chair. If (b) happens and (a) hasn't happened, then an email message gets sent to the chairs asking that one of them approve. Either (a) or (b) can happen by either email or web site access. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 30 22:31:25 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA24109; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:31:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1ySa-0006zy-0s; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:33:25 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1yPK-0001X5-Dp; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:30:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1yJN-0000ps-Df for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:23:53 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA23774 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:23:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exprod6ob4.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.214] helo=psmtp.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1yLF-0006rH-HZ for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:25:50 -0400 Received: from source ([192.150.22.8]) by exprod6ob4.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:23:50 PDT Received: from inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-3 [153.32.251.51]) by smtp-relay-8.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7V2NZbA029159 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:23:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7V2NZkq005186 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:23:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 (c-131-136.corp.adobe.com [153.32.131.136]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I3A007D2HBA66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> for tools-team@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:23:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:23:34 -0700 From: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication In-reply-to: <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> To: tools-team@ietf.org Message-id: <0I3A007D3HBA66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcSO1jXN+x0bHg7/TgyytzjiqDV7HgAKwYoQ X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT One good reason for the chair not to submit the -00 draft directly is that the document contains an IPR statement, "by submitting this document, I assert...". So the author(s) need to submit. In fact, we might even want some kind of approval for versions of the document where authors have to ack their agreement to future versions. Personally, I've had the situation where some co-author has submitted a new version with my name on it that I didn't like the changes at all! To the point where I asked my name to be taken off. Larry _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 00:55:43 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA04312; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:55:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C20iH-0001dx-4g; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:57:45 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C20ct-00035V-QU; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:52:11 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C20Wg-00021E-SU for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:45:47 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA03952 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:45:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C20YY-0001UJ-BS for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:47:45 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7V4jZ9d001870; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:45:35 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7V4jZTN001869; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:45:35 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:45:35 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication In-Reply-To: <0I3A007D3HBA66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: <20040830222524.R97774@measurement-factory.com> References: <0I3A007D3HBA66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081 On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Larry Masinter wrote: > One good reason for the chair not to submit the -00 draft directly > is that the document contains an IPR statement, "by submitting this > document, I assert...". The current text seems to be even worse: "By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents ..." > So the author(s) need to submit. Yes, I realized this important reason after the debate with Henrik was over. I agree that this makes Chair-submission less attractive. On the other hand, I have to note that the whole situation is rather messy: - IPR statements imply that WG draft authors are responsible for content but IETF holds the copyright and can change authors (and/or content?) at any time. - IETF process implies that WGs are responsible for content but only a few revisions receive formal WG consensus calls Thus, a WG draft is a document that may have virtually nothing to do with WG consensus, listed authors, and their embedded IPR claims. Yet, we are being told that we need to enforce legal requirements for drafts. It smells like something is fundamentally broken here, but that something is outside of TOOLs scope. > In fact, we might even want some kind of approval for versions of > the document where authors have to ack their agreement to future > versions. > > Personally, I've had the situation where some co-author has > submitted a new version with my name on it that I didn't like the > changes at all! To the point where I asked my name to be taken off. Noted. With the current interface, I can make anybody an author without that person consent. And, according to the boilerplate emitted by xml2rfc-1.25, I can post IPR claims for that person! Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 00:57:51 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA04440; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:57:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C20kL-0001gs-LL; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:59:53 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C20ds-0003J1-U0; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:53:12 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C20cI-0002uD-Ta for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:51:35 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA04207 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:51:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C20eD-0001aX-EV for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:53:33 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7V4pW9d002351; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:51:32 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7V4pWLS002350; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:51:32 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:51:32 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication In-Reply-To: <0I3A0074BH7H66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: <20040830224632.A97774@measurement-factory.com> References: <0I3A0074BH7H66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 538aad3a3c4f01d8b6a6477ca4248793 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f4c2cf0bccc868e4cc88dace71fb3f44 Larry, I believe your comments are in line with my recent "draft work authorization" suggestion, especially the "(a) happens before (b)" case. The WG/Chair approve more than just the -00 submission. The WG approves dedicating certain resources to draft-related work, and that event should be recorded on its own, with one of the side-effects being automated draft submission approvals. See my "WG draft work authorization" e-mail for more details. Thank you, Alex. On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Larry Masinter wrote: > I think, in general, it is a good idea if the tools do > not require unnecessary serialization of multi-party > protocols. > > In the case of submission of a -00 draft, there are two > parties, the submitter (one of the listed authors of the > WG draft) and the approving chair (one of the listed > co-chairs of the working group). > > There are two actions: > > submitter prepares document and submits it for posting > approving chair approves this event. > > These events should be allowed in either order: > > a) The approving chair can pre-approve a submitter > "Person-with-email-address-XXX@YYY has my permission > to submit draft draft-WGNAME-DRAFTNAME-00" > > b) The submitter can submit a draft > "Here is draft-WGNAME-DRAFTNAME-00" > > If (a) happens before (b), then the draft is noted > as being approved by the chair. If (b) happens and > (a) hasn't happened, then an email message gets sent > to the chairs asking that one of them approve. > > Either (a) or (b) can happen by either email or > web site access. > > > _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 13:21:56 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA06943; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:21:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2CMV-0001BN-Iu; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:24:04 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2C1v-0002c0-1B; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:02:47 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2Bnn-00079T-Pa for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:48:11 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA04017 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:48:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2Bpk-0000CL-VY for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:50:16 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7VGm39d026576 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 10:48:03 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7VGm3Ga026575; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 10:48:03 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 10:48:03 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: tools-team@ietf.org Message-ID: <20040831103840.X20928@measurement-factory.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126 Subject: [Tools-team] Reshaping ID submission draft X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 FYI: I have applied all micro-level comments received so far to the ID submission draft. My next macro-level step is to remove the Full Automation as an explicit mode due to at most lukewarm support and misunderstanding within the TOOLs team and Secretariat. With the Full Automation gone, it would most likely not make sense to talk about different modes of toolset operation. Essentially, there will be one mode (currently Publisher Automation mode). The humand-to-human interface will be described briefly as a mandatory "last resort" option with virtually no formal requirements in scope of this draft. If any of the above sounds like a bad idea, please throw something at me now. Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 16:44:44 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA00777; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:44:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2FWn-0007kl-D6; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:46:53 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2FBj-0003NA-Mh; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:25:07 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2Eqa-0006az-Cw for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:03:16 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA23986 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:03:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net ([81.228.9.112]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2Esb-0005nO-TD for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:05:23 -0400 Received: by av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id DF62B37EE4; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:02:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.178]) by av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1A8D37E4B; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:02:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp1-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96AEE3801B; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:02:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C2Eq2-0000b6-00; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:02:42 +0200 Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:02:41 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] WG draft work authorization Message-Id: <20040831220241.0c986dd1@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <20040830145706.D62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830223356.3e908a5a@chardonnay> <20040830145706.D62186@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4b800b1eab964a31702fa68f1ff0e955 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d8ae4fd88fcaf47c1a71c804d04f413d Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alex, I definitely like the scheme below better than the chair-submits scheme, but it's still a bit more work for the chair than the current state of things. However, I also agree with Larry's comment in another mail about providing a way to handle both aprove-before-00-submission and approve-after-00-submission. Either of the methods you propose below would work well for the approve-before-00-submission. One thing to keep in mind with the scheme below is that it requires the approved draft name to match the name actually used by the submitting author. (This may sound trivial, but experience has shown it to be anything but...) That could be handled either by the token issuing variation, or simply by generating an informative mail (giving the approved name) to the author as a result of the chair approval action. Henrik On Monday, 30 Aug 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote: > > Henrik and I spent a few cycles and failed to agree whether > chair-submits-00 or author-submits-and-chair-approves-00 scheme is > better. I believe the whole argument can be avoided if we look at the > problem from draft _work_ authorization rather than draft _submission_ > authorization point of view: > > What if a Chair that makes "WG draft" consensus call, could authorize > corresponding WG draft work as a stand-alone action, recorded by the > IETF system (without submitting any drafts)? When an author submits > the corresponding WG draft (any version) the system would check for > prior Chair authorization. If the authorization exists, the draft is > posted. If not, the draft is rejected and the author is instructed to > seek WG/Chair approval first. > > A slight variation: instead of the Chair recording a work approval in > the "system", the Chair can generate an "approval token" (a text > string) and give it to the author. The author would attach the > "approval token" to all WG draft revisions she submits. IETF tools can > generate tokens for Chairs, of course. There can be a black list of > stolen approval tokens and tokens would expire, etc. > > In both variations, it would be possible to both authorize WG draft > work and stop such work if the group decides to abandon the draft. It > would also be possible to stop a given rogue author for submitting > changes (perhaps the author was banned from group mailing list using > appropriate IETF procedures). > > > I like this scheme also because it allows us to capture some > information about the WG draft work as a whole (e.g., deadlines, > expected RFC status, dependencies, etc), without piggybacking > exceptions to the WG draft submission interface. This can also > _reduce_ work for Chairs as the interface can send appropriate e-mail > message to the mailing list, declaring consensus to adopt/start a WG > draft and specifying all the details (that a busy Chair might forget). > > > What do you think? Would any of the above be better than > chair-submits-00 or author-submits-and-chair-approves-00 scheme? > > Thanks, > > Alex. > > _______________________________________________ > Tools-team mailing list > Tools-team@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team > _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 16:47:46 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01204; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:47:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2FZj-0007ss-7g; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:49:55 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2FEx-0005Vk-Hv; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:28:27 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2Ew8-0002Ef-7I for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:09:00 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA25202 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:08:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net ([81.228.9.112]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2Ey9-0006Cf-I8 for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:11:07 -0400 Received: by av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 94A2937EB5; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:08:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp1-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp1-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.177]) by av4-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87D0037E4B; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:08:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp1-1-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7008D38013; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:08:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C2Evb-0000cy-00; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:08:27 +0200 Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:08:26 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Some input on the I-D publication process (Was: Fw: Diff between IETF drafts) Message-Id: <20040831220826.3ec8180a@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <20040830152445.N62186@measurement-factory.com> References: <20040830220733.5fe217c0@chardonnay> <20040830152445.N62186@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7baded97d9887f7a0c7e8a33c2e3ea1b Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alex, On Monday, 30 Aug 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote: > Henrik, > > I strongly support archiving all draft versions on IETF site. > Generating diffs against any two versions (and last two versions by > default) would be a simple and effective use of such an archive. I > think this is out of ID submission draft scope, but hopefully within > the TOOLs team scope. This probably belongs to the Documents > Repository interface. I agree. > Personally, I think it is silly to remove expired drafts, but > if I am the only person thinking that (on the TOOLs team), we can at > least recommend that draft versions are accessible until the latest > version expires. While still silly (IMHO), it might gain more support > from IETF than a consistent "all posted IDs are accessible at IETF" > policy. Yes. (One thought is that we could leave the official draft repository with the current mechanism of draft removal after expiery, but if we provide a different cvs / svn like repository for rapid changes, it would be possible to trace a draft and draft diffs back there, even if the draft no longer existed in the regular draft repository.) > If neither flies with IESG, we can at least recommend > development or adoption of the draft diff generation tool. Drafts are > not programs, and it is not an easy exercise today to generate a good > diff! As I've been maintaining one draft diff tool, I know :-) > A public draft-diff tool should be recommended even if IETF > provides past versions and diffs, of course. Yes, definitely. Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 16:50:11 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01373; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:50:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2Fc4-0007wa-0X; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:52:20 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2FFT-00067V-Or; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:28:59 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2EyY-0003jv-AY for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:11:30 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA25943 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:11:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av9-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net ([81.228.11.116]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2F0Z-0006SD-Sl for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:13:37 -0400 Received: by av9-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id EB3B337EB5; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:10:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.164]) by av9-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAC2337E4E; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:10:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A6ED37E46; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:10:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C2Exz-0000dr-00; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:10:55 +0200 Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:10:55 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Larry Masinter Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication Message-Id: <20040831221055.55c917a5@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <0I3A0074BH7H66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> References: <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> <0I3A0074BH7H66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Larry, On Monday, 30 Aug 2004, Larry Masinter wrote: > I think, in general, it is a good idea if the tools do > not require unnecessary serialization of multi-party > protocols. Very good point. > In the case of submission of a -00 draft, there are two > parties, the submitter (one of the listed authors of the > WG draft) and the approving chair (one of the listed > co-chairs of the working group). > > There are two actions: > > submitter prepares document and submits it for posting > approving chair approves this event. > > These events should be allowed in either order: > > a) The approving chair can pre-approve a submitter > "Person-with-email-address-XXX@YYY has my permission > to submit draft draft-WGNAME-DRAFTNAME-00" > > b) The submitter can submit a draft > "Here is draft-WGNAME-DRAFTNAME-00" > > If (a) happens before (b), then the draft is noted > as being approved by the chair. If (b) happens and > (a) hasn't happened, then an email message gets sent > to the chairs asking that one of them approve. > > Either (a) or (b) can happen by either email or > web site access. Mmm, I'd been thinking only of an email mechanism for the b) before a) case, but you're quite right, I think - Either (a) or (b) should be possible by either email or web site access. Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 16:50:51 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01440; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:50:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2Fch-0007yM-Ch; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:53:00 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2FGG-0006hH-88; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:29:48 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2F0l-00055C-Pb for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:13:47 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA26354 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:13:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av9-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net ([81.228.11.115]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2F2m-0006ae-Or for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:15:54 -0400 Received: by av9-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 2625337E92; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:13:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.164]) by av9-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1181237E44; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:13:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3A7737E4A; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:13:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C2F0D-0000eL-00; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:13:13 +0200 Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:13:13 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Larry Masinter Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication Message-Id: <20040831221313.042c2124@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <0I3A007D3HBA66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> References: <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> <0I3A007D3HBA66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Larry, On Monday, 30 Aug 2004, Larry Masinter wrote: > One good reason for the chair not to submit the -00 draft > directly is that the document contains an IPR statement, > "by submitting this document, I assert...". > > So the author(s) need to submit. I agree. > In fact, we might even want some kind of approval > for versions of the document where authors have > to ack their agreement to future versions. Don't know if this is needed .. might be .. ? > Personally, I've had the situation where some co-author > has submitted a new version with my name on it that > I didn't like the changes at all! To the point where > I asked my name to be taken off. At the same time, we don't want to require all authors to sign off on each submission, I think. Maybe this case should be handled by manual intervention? Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 16:51:42 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01619; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:51:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2FdW-00082P-Cr; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:53:51 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2FRh-0003Ee-U8; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:41:37 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2F8g-0001FY-P9 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:21:58 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA27510 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:21:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av5-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net ([81.228.11.112]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2FAi-00071w-HB for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:24:06 -0400 Received: by av5-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id AA91D37EE6; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:21:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.163]) by av5-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C1A437E46; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:21:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp3-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E9EA37E66; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:21:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C2F89-0000gC-00; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:21:25 +0200 Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:21:25 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication Message-Id: <20040831222125.6e0e155b@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <20040830222524.R97774@measurement-factory.com> References: <0I3A007D3HBA66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> <20040830222524.R97774@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 41c17b4b16d1eedaa8395c26e9a251c4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 25620135586de10c627e3628c432b04a Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alex, On Monday, 30 Aug 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote: > On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Larry Masinter wrote: > > > One good reason for the chair not to submit the -00 draft directly > > is that the document contains an IPR statement, "by submitting this > > document, I assert...". > > The current text seems to be even worse: "By submitting this > Internet-Draft, each author represents ..." > > > So the author(s) need to submit. > > Yes, I realized this important reason after the debate with Henrik was > over. I agree that this makes Chair-submission less attractive. Ok. > On the other hand, I have to note that the whole situation is rather > messy: > > - IPR statements imply that WG draft authors are responsible > for content but IETF holds the copyright and can change > authors (and/or content?) at any time. Mm, not quite - the IPR statement is about the authors' knowledge of relevant IPR, rather than the draft content itself ... > - IETF process implies that WGs are responsible for content > but only a few revisions receive formal WG consensus calls Nevertheless, discussions of a draft occur continuously on the lists. > Thus, a WG draft is a document that may have virtually nothing to do > with WG consensus, listed authors, and their embedded IPR claims. I think this is an exaggeration... If a draft has virtually nothing to do with WG consensus, we have a pathological situation where many people including the chairs have been blatantly not doing their job, I believe. > Yet, > we are being told that we need to enforce legal requirements for > drafts. It smells like something is fundamentally broken here, but > that something is outside of TOOLs scope. Not sure I fully agree on the brokenness - by reason given in my comments above... But still, I think it's Ok for us to reflect on matters like these, lest we make things more silly than they need to be :-) > > In fact, we might even want some kind of approval for versions of > > the document where authors have to ack their agreement to future > > versions. > > > > Personally, I've had the situation where some co-author has > > submitted a new version with my name on it that I didn't like the > > changes at all! To the point where I asked my name to be taken off. > > Noted. With the current interface, I can make anybody an author > without that person consent. And, according to the boilerplate emitted > by xml2rfc-1.25, I can post IPR claims for that person! Right. So we maybe need to ask ourselves if we should actually solicit approval from not only submitter and chair, but from all the authors on WG -00 submission? Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 16:51:45 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01645; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:51:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2FdZ-00082i-1X; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:53:54 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2FRl-0003G4-Bp; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:41:41 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2F9s-0001jN-6z for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:23:12 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA27805 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:23:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2FBv-00073Y-3q for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:25:19 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7VKNA9d036568; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:23:10 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7VKNAvF036567; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:23:10 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:23:10 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] WG draft work authorization In-Reply-To: <20040831220241.0c986dd1@chardonnay> Message-ID: <20040831140600.S20928@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830223356.3e908a5a@chardonnay> <20040830145706.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040831220241.0c986dd1@chardonnay> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2857c5c041d6c02d7181d602c22822c8 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 67c1ea29f88502ef6a32ccec927970f0 Henrik, I agree that the amount of work is going to be slightly more compared to today case of a minimalist Chair responding with a single-word "Approved!" e-mail. Perhaps that increase in work is natural. Is it possible that to achieve desired level of automation and cross-referencing, additional metadata is unavoidable and somebody has to type that metadata at least once? We can try to design the interface so that the Chair only needs to type in the draft name and hit an "Approve" button, leaving other fields unfilled. The system would then let _any_ WG author to submit a matching 00 draft. Not as secure/robust as I would want, but technically possible. If we can agree that the Chair should also fill in authors/editors e-mails, then security/robustness would significantly increase. The authors and editors can be responsible for filling the rest of the metadata for the work. Can I assume the "WG draft work authorization" scheme and adjust the ID submission draft accordingly? If yes, would documenting "WG draft work authorization" details be in scope of that draft? I do not think so; it seems like a stand-alone interface (much simpler than the ID submission toolset). Thanks, Alex. P.S. I understand the name synchronization issue. Personally, I would argue that submissions of yet-unauthorized drafts must be rejected, possibly with a pre-filled "please authorize" invitation sent to the Chairs. I seems wrong to me to create state for (and spend documentation/implementation energy on) something that has not been authorized by the WG. I think the concept of the WG necessarily authorizing WG work is a natural one. On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > Hi Alex, > > I definitely like the scheme below better than the chair-submits > scheme, but it's still a bit more work for the chair than the > current state of things. However, I also agree with Larry's comment > in another mail about providing a way to handle both > aprove-before-00-submission and approve-after-00-submission. > Either of the methods you propose below would work well for the > approve-before-00-submission. > > One thing to keep in mind with the scheme below is that it requires > the approved draft name to match the name actually used by the > submitting author. (This may sound trivial, but experience has > shown it to be anything but...) That could be handled either by the > token issuing variation, or simply by generating an informative mail > (giving the approved name) to the author as a result of the chair > approval action. > > Henrik > > > On Monday, 30 Aug 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote: >> >> Henrik and I spent a few cycles and failed to agree whether >> chair-submits-00 or author-submits-and-chair-approves-00 scheme is >> better. I believe the whole argument can be avoided if we look at the >> problem from draft _work_ authorization rather than draft _submission_ >> authorization point of view: >> >> What if a Chair that makes "WG draft" consensus call, could authorize >> corresponding WG draft work as a stand-alone action, recorded by the >> IETF system (without submitting any drafts)? When an author submits >> the corresponding WG draft (any version) the system would check for >> prior Chair authorization. If the authorization exists, the draft is >> posted. If not, the draft is rejected and the author is instructed to >> seek WG/Chair approval first. >> >> A slight variation: instead of the Chair recording a work approval in >> the "system", the Chair can generate an "approval token" (a text >> string) and give it to the author. The author would attach the >> "approval token" to all WG draft revisions she submits. IETF tools can >> generate tokens for Chairs, of course. There can be a black list of >> stolen approval tokens and tokens would expire, etc. >> >> In both variations, it would be possible to both authorize WG draft >> work and stop such work if the group decides to abandon the draft. It >> would also be possible to stop a given rogue author for submitting >> changes (perhaps the author was banned from group mailing list using >> appropriate IETF procedures). >> >> >> I like this scheme also because it allows us to capture some >> information about the WG draft work as a whole (e.g., deadlines, >> expected RFC status, dependencies, etc), without piggybacking >> exceptions to the WG draft submission interface. This can also >> _reduce_ work for Chairs as the interface can send appropriate e-mail >> message to the mailing list, declaring consensus to adopt/start a WG >> draft and specifying all the details (that a busy Chair might forget). >> >> >> What do you think? Would any of the above be better than >> chair-submits-00 or author-submits-and-chair-approves-00 scheme? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Alex. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tools-team mailing list >> Tools-team@ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team >> > _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 17:15:06 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03356; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:15:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2G0C-0000Co-6x; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:17:16 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2Fea-0007nI-Bg; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:54:56 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2FXM-00050m-Ja for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:47:28 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01155 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:47:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av7-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.110]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2FZP-0007qr-GQ for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:49:36 -0400 Received: by av7-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id F098D37E60; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:46:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.183]) by av7-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDCB337E4C; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:46:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B83B837E49; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:46:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C2FWn-0000lu-00; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:46:53 +0200 Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:46:52 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] WG draft work authorization Message-Id: <20040831224652.2390822d@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <20040831140600.S20928@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830223356.3e908a5a@chardonnay> <20040830145706.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040831220241.0c986dd1@chardonnay> <20040831140600.S20928@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 0ff9c467ad7f19c2a6d058acd7faaec8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 789c141a303c09204b537a4078e2a63f Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alex, On Tuesday, 31 Aug 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote: > > Henrik, > > I agree that the amount of work is going to be slightly more > compared to today case of a minimalist Chair responding with a > single-word "Approved!" e-mail. Perhaps that increase in work is > natural. Is it possible that to achieve desired level of automation > and cross-referencing, additional metadata is unavoidable and somebody > has to type that metadata at least once? Probably true :-) > We can try to design the interface so that the Chair only > needs to type in the draft name and hit an "Approve" button, leaving > other fields unfilled. The system would then let _any_ WG author to > submit a matching 00 draft. Not as secure/robust as I would want, but > technically possible. If we can agree that the Chair should also fill > in authors/editors e-mails, then security/robustness would > significantly increase. The authors and editors can be responsible for > filling the rest of the metadata for the work. Agreed. But note that this is for the pre-approval case. I think Larry's point of supporting both pre-approval and post-approval is a good one. > Can I assume the "WG draft work authorization" scheme and > adjust the ID submission draft accordingly? If I understand you correctly, I'm OK with this as one prong of the fork - as said above. It would be good to have some input from Stas and Bill, too :-) > If yes, would documenting "WG draft work authorization" > details be in scope of that draft? I do not think so; it seems like a > stand-alone interface (much simpler than the ID submission toolset). Don't you think it's part of the I-D submission toolset? Even if it could generate other data, the I-D sumbission toolset would be incomplete without this, I think? Henrik > > P.S. I understand the name synchronization issue. Personally, I would > argue that submissions of yet-unauthorized drafts must be > rejected, possibly with a pre-filled "please authorize" > invitation sent to the Chairs. I seems wrong to me to create > state for (and spend documentation/implementation energy on) > something that has not been authorized by the WG. I think the > concept of the WG necessarily authorizing WG work is a natural > one. Oh, but in practice I've not come across authors submitting a -00 before the workgroup has OK'd it - but there's a wide variation on the level of contact authors take with chairs when they've generated the -00 and are ready to sumbit it. Some just do it, some email the chair first, most cc the chairs on the submission mail to the secretariat. I'm sure that somewhere unacceptable, unauthorized -00s have been sumbitted, but as long as our design doesn't break in this case, we shouldn't spend too much work on it. Henrik > On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > > > Hi Alex, > > > > I definitely like the scheme below better than the chair-submits > > scheme, but it's still a bit more work for the chair than the > > current state of things. However, I also agree with Larry's comment > > in another mail about providing a way to handle both > > aprove-before-00-submission and approve-after-00-submission. > > Either of the methods you propose below would work well for the > > approve-before-00-submission. > > > > One thing to keep in mind with the scheme below is that it requires > > the approved draft name to match the name actually used by the > > submitting author. (This may sound trivial, but experience has > > shown it to be anything but...) That could be handled either by the > > token issuing variation, or simply by generating an informative mail > > (giving the approved name) to the author as a result of the chair > > approval action. > > > > Henrik > > > > > > On Monday, 30 Aug 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote: > >> > >> Henrik and I spent a few cycles and failed to agree whether > >> chair-submits-00 or author-submits-and-chair-approves-00 scheme is > >> better. I believe the whole argument can be avoided if we look at the > >> problem from draft _work_ authorization rather than draft _submission_ > >> authorization point of view: > >> > >> What if a Chair that makes "WG draft" consensus call, could authorize > >> corresponding WG draft work as a stand-alone action, recorded by the > >> IETF system (without submitting any drafts)? When an author submits > >> the corresponding WG draft (any version) the system would check for > >> prior Chair authorization. If the authorization exists, the draft is > >> posted. If not, the draft is rejected and the author is instructed to > >> seek WG/Chair approval first. > >> > >> A slight variation: instead of the Chair recording a work approval in > >> the "system", the Chair can generate an "approval token" (a text > >> string) and give it to the author. The author would attach the > >> "approval token" to all WG draft revisions she submits. IETF tools can > >> generate tokens for Chairs, of course. There can be a black list of > >> stolen approval tokens and tokens would expire, etc. > >> > >> In both variations, it would be possible to both authorize WG draft > >> work and stop such work if the group decides to abandon the draft. It > >> would also be possible to stop a given rogue author for submitting > >> changes (perhaps the author was banned from group mailing list using > >> appropriate IETF procedures). > >> > >> > >> I like this scheme also because it allows us to capture some > >> information about the WG draft work as a whole (e.g., deadlines, > >> expected RFC status, dependencies, etc), without piggybacking > >> exceptions to the WG draft submission interface. This can also > >> _reduce_ work for Chairs as the interface can send appropriate e-mail > >> message to the mailing list, declaring consensus to adopt/start a WG > >> draft and specifying all the details (that a busy Chair might forget). > >> > >> > >> What do you think? Would any of the above be better than > >> chair-submits-00 or author-submits-and-chair-approves-00 scheme? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Alex. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tools-team mailing list > >> Tools-team@ietf.org > >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team > >> > > _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 17:15:24 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03427; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:15:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2G0S-0000E5-KF; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:17:32 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2FkP-0000Og-2q; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:00:57 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2FaE-00066G-QK for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:50:26 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01414 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:50:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2FcH-0007xM-Uc for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:52:34 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7VKoO9d037610; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:50:24 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7VKoOKX037609; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:50:24 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:50:24 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication In-Reply-To: <20040831222125.6e0e155b@chardonnay> Message-ID: <20040831142648.Q20928@measurement-factory.com> References: <0I3A007D3HBA66@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> <20040830222524.R97774@measurement-factory.com> <20040831222125.6e0e155b@chardonnay> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e1e48a527f609d1be2bc8d8a70eb76cb Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > So we maybe need to ask ourselves if we should actually solicit > approval from not only submitter and chair, but from all the authors > on WG -00 submission? A consistent lawyer-friendly approach would be slightly worse (more complicated). A person must consent to being an author of a draft. When consenting, the person can chose whether their consent is per-draft, per-draft-version, per-draft-boilerplate-version, etc. The system requests (or not) approvals from then-current authors to post a given submitted draft version according to the above preferences. For WG drafts, a Chair can always delete authors, invite authors, but cannot force an author to sign up (because of IPR concerns). When an author is deleted or invited, she is notified. An author can always delete himself, with a note sent to other authors and the Chair. For individual drafts, any current author (or, alternatively, the first author) has Chair-like powers. Note that the above is a good illustration why "draft work" object is not identical to the "draft version" object. All posted draft versions have authors (possibly anonymous) but "draft work" might not have any authors sometimes. I am not sure IETF is ready or needs such a formalism. Personally, I would prefer deleting all IPR claims from the drafts to avoid most of the above problems. But I am sure legal advice would be to keep claims explicit (lawyers, naturally, want to make sure they have work to do). If so, author consent would probably be required to enforce those claims and the above system seems necessary. Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 17:28:33 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA04468; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:28:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2GDA-0000Y6-FL; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:30:43 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2Fze-0004FT-Sy; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:16:42 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2Fua-0002S0-GP for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:11:28 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03088 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:11:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2Fwc-000072-Uf for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:13:36 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7VLBQ9d038641; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:11:26 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7VLBQJs038640; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:11:26 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:11:26 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] WG draft work authorization In-Reply-To: <20040831224652.2390822d@chardonnay> Message-ID: <20040831145229.Y20928@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830223356.3e908a5a@chardonnay> <20040830145706.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040831220241.0c986dd1@chardonnay> <20040831140600.S20928@measurement-factory.com> <20040831224652.2390822d@chardonnay> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f4c2cf0bccc868e4cc88dace71fb3f44 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e8a67952aa972b528dd04570d58ad8fe On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > But note that this is for the pre-approval case. Yes. > I think Larry's point of supporting both pre-approval and > post-approval is a good one. I disagree that post-approval needs to be supported, but note that supporting it would not be a technical problem and, with some coding, would even save Chair authors name typing (those can be collected from submissions pending Chair approval). I just do not think this mode is worth spending our and Secretariat resources (even though it is in use today); and I think it would take a lot more lines of code to support compared to the straightforward approve-then-submit mode. > Don't you think it's part of the I-D submission toolset? Even if it > could generate other data, the I-D sumbission toolset would be > incomplete without this, I think? Yes, ID submission without Chair approval mechanism would not be functional for -00 versions of WG drafts, but I am not sure that's enough motivation to describe "author" management and "00 draft approval" in one ID submission draft. They seem to be sufficiently isolated interfaces. This is not a big deal though. Let's hear other opinions... > Oh, but in practice I've not come across authors submitting a -00 > before the workgroup has OK'd it - but there's a wide variation on > the level of contact authors take with chairs when they've generated > the -00 and are ready to sumbit it. Some just do it, some email the > chair first, most cc the chairs on the submission mail to the > secretariat. Yes, but I think we may be benting over to support all current modes of operation instead of reasonably trimming what is allowed by a more formalized interface. The toolset does not have to support everything IETFers do today. It needs to support everything they need to do, with a few bells and whistles on top. Imagine an interface that encourages the Chair to hit a button on a web site instead of manually writing a "we have consensus to start/adopt WG draft work..." e-mail. Once the Chair hits that button, an e-mail is sent to the WG mailing list and WG draft work is marked as approved. Authors are invited. A searchable public record (event, tasks) is created and linked. If a WG participant acts before the consensus call, he is politely reminded to wait for the consensus call/authorization first. I see no harm in that. Can we have submission-before-approval as a MAY-level feature until we get more feedback? :-) Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 17:40:27 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05005; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:40:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2GOh-0000lk-Hm; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:42:37 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2GHP-0007s0-8D; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:35:03 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2GBB-0006TL-DH for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:28:38 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA04490 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:28:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av9-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.107]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2GDC-0000X2-VN for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:30:45 -0400 Received: by av9-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 09A9537F09; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 23:28:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.182]) by av9-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB92937E42; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 23:28:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDD3D37E4F; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 23:28:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from chardonnay ([127.0.0.1]) by chardonnay.levkowetz.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C2GAd-0000xr-00; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 23:28:03 +0200 Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 23:28:03 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] WG draft work authorization Message-Id: <20040831232803.6f4924bf@chardonnay> In-Reply-To: <20040831145229.Y20928@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830223356.3e908a5a@chardonnay> <20040830145706.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040831220241.0c986dd1@chardonnay> <20040831140600.S20928@measurement-factory.com> <20040831224652.2390822d@chardonnay> <20040831145229.Y20928@measurement-factory.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 69a74e02bbee44ab4f8eafdbcedd94a1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Alex, On Tuesday, 31 Aug 2004, Alex Rousskov wrote: ... > I disagree that post-approval needs to be supported, but note that > supporting it would not be a technical problem and, with some coding, > would even save Chair authors name typing (those can be collected from > submissions pending Chair approval). I just do not think this mode is > worth spending our and Secretariat resources (even though it is in use > today); and I think it would take a lot more lines of code to support > compared to the straightforward approve-then-submit mode. There seems to be a wide discrepancy between your perception here and mine - to me, the submit-then-approve case is simply a case of re-using the code needed to verify the submitter being in control of the alleged submitter email address. *Very* straightforward. And I'm also slightly surprised ,:-) because it was you who pointed out the advantages of re-using our authorization tools... Anyway... ... > Can we have submission-before-approval as a MAY-level feature until we > get more feedback? :-) Sure, as a placeholder. We clearly don't have consensus yet ;-) Bill, Stas, input please? Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 17:50:46 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05539; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:50:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2GYh-0000xi-3e; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:52:56 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2GTx-0001eo-0b; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:48:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2GNA-0000QX-Tn for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:41:01 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05040 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:40:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2GPE-0000m7-PR for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:43:09 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7VLex9d039702; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:40:59 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7VLextE039701; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:40:59 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:40:59 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] WG draft work authorization In-Reply-To: <20040831232803.6f4924bf@chardonnay> Message-ID: <20040831153148.Q20928@measurement-factory.com> References: <412CC436.8030100@levkowetz.com> <20040825163551.H49770@measurement-factory.com> <412F3422.9090105@levkowetz.com> <20040830105636.M62186@measurement-factory.com> <41336797.2070107@levkowetz.com> <20040830125315.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830213324.0dcf82e4@chardonnay> <20040830133524.X62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040830223356.3e908a5a@chardonnay> <20040830145706.D62186@measurement-factory.com> <20040831220241.0c986dd1@chardonnay> <20040831140600.S20928@measurement-factory.com> <20040831224652.2390822d@chardonnay> <20040831145229.Y20928@measurement-factory.com> <20040831232803.6f4924bf@chardonnay> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > There seems to be a wide discrepancy between your perception here > and mine - to me, the submit-then-approve case is simply a case of > re-using the code needed to verify the submitter being in control of > the alleged submitter email address. *Very* straightforward. The complexity is not in authenticating the submitter, but in maintaining state between authenticated submission and authenticated approval. That extra pending-submission state is absent in the approve-then-submit case. Key approve-then-submit objects are: approval, posted submission. Key submit-then-approve objects are: pending submission, approval, posted submission. A 50% increase of work, just by a simple object count. But we already argued about a similar trade-off, without success... > And I'm also slightly surprised ,:-) because it was you who pointed > out the advantages of re-using our authorization tools... The code necessary to manage the extra pending-approval state would be specific to the submit-then-approve case. It would not be reused as far as I can see. Only actor authentication code can be reused in this context. Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 18:28:53 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA08573; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:28:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2H9Z-0001Xr-5P; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:31:04 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2H4b-0008HX-LN; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:25:53 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2Gxa-0005xX-N6 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:18:38 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07901 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:18:36 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200408312218.SAA07901@ietf.org> Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2Gzd-0001PK-II for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:20:46 -0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=psg.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1C2GxM-000Pqi-3k; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:18:24 +0000 To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication In-Reply-To: Message from Alex Rousskov of "Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:50:24 MDT." <20040831142648.Q20928@measurement-factory.com> Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:18:23 -0700 From: Allison Mankin X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 538aad3a3c4f01d8b6a6477ca4248793 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org, Henrik Levkowetz X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f4c2cf0bccc868e4cc88dace71fb3f44 Hi, everyone, I'm reading the mailing list carefully now that I'm back from my way-too-disconnected vacation, and liking the discussion. But I want to point out a few things. They're mostly related to the last day of messages. - Remember IETF has decided things such as the requirement for the IPR statement on the drafts, so the Tools team/tool interface isn't in the position to re-think that consensus. - The IETF also has pretty formally decided that it cannot retain old drafts, and so a tool can't change the actual repository policy without getting into modifying the standards process. But I do think a cvs-like and diff-supporting tool could be cool and important. - Some things IETF hasn't formally decided, but a Tool framework might formalize by accident: "membership" registration is an example. Currently even chairs don't have to be consistent in what email address they use for the very weak email-address authentication we use for them. To the extent that we introduce authentication and identity, they will be a significant change in the IETF, where the only membership required is joining any mailing list. There've been earlier parts of the thread that have talked about the several authors verifying submission, and things like that. I think the farthest this team could go on identity in the IETF as it exists now is to authenticate chairs and editors (they are* covered by ISOC's liability insurance). That's all you are talking about in the recent notes, but just to be aware, because the same tool is for all the i-ds, and more than half are non-working-group. - I don't know if this has come up during phone calls: There's a requirement for a fairly simple i-d submission tool to offload mail-based submission as early as possible because of the increasing loss patterns due to anti-spam tools interacting with varied types of submissions. The detection of lost submissions has not been perfect or always timely, and several working groups have been quite badly affected by these problems. So if there are some harder to settle parts of the requirements, if it's possible to put them in a second phase, that might be desireable. Allison P.S. about post-approval: some working groups have been editor-driven or laissez faire so that the 00 is submitted and the working group and chair have not been well aware. It used to be more common; there were problem working group chairs in CCAMP to give you one example where you can see a huge number of i-ds due to this phenomenon. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 18:29:45 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA08615; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:29:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2HAS-0001YS-7l; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:31:56 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2H4c-0008Hi-1G; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:25:54 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2H2W-0007cQ-Ls for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:23:44 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA08218 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:23:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exprod6ob2.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.212] helo=psmtp.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2H4Z-0001RX-7P for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:25:52 -0400 Received: from source ([192.150.22.8]) by exprod6ob2.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:23:30 PDT Received: from inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-3 [153.32.251.51]) by smtp-relay-8.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7VMN4bA017292; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:23:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-3.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7VMN4kq012909; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:23:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 (c-130-169.corp.adobe.com [153.32.130.169]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I3C00MH10UF3A@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:23:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:23:03 -0700 From: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] WG draft work authorization In-reply-to: <20040831224652.2390822d@chardonnay> To: "'Henrik Levkowetz'" , "'Alex Rousskov'" Message-id: <0I3C00MH20UF3A@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcSPn5s57bYNl+rrRMWBVOI/4sp4GgACUewg X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 68c8cc8a64a9d0402e43b8eee9fc4199 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT I think we should rank requirements by their importance and utility, and not argue too much about implementation difficulty, as long as we believe implementation is feasible. I don't think we can judge implementation difficulty without more information about what's available in the implementation environment. In most workflow software, multi-state approval cycles are the norm. Larry _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 18:42:18 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA09154; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:42:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2HMb-0001j0-0m; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:44:29 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2HAL-0001B9-SM; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:31:49 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2HAC-0000yE-1q for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:31:40 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA08738 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:31:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2HCC-0001aY-U3 for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:33:48 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7VMVU9d041993; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:31:30 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7VMVUxg041992; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:31:30 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:31:30 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Allison Mankin Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication In-Reply-To: <200408312218.i7VMIY9d041367@measurement-factory.com> Message-ID: <20040831162221.P20928@measurement-factory.com> References: <200408312218.i7VMIY9d041367@measurement-factory.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Allison Mankin wrote: > Hi, everyone, Hi Allison, It is nice to hear a fresh voice :-). Just one quick clarification regarding your statement below, if I may. > - The IETF also has pretty formally decided that it cannot retain > old drafts, and so a tool can't change the actual repository policy > without getting into modifying the standards process. But I do > think a cvs-like and diff-supporting tool could be cool and > important. Do you think that archiving older versions until the latest draft version expires would violate the above formal decision? Or, as a minor variation, archiving all unexpired versions of a draft? Providing an online "what has changed since I last checked" interface would be very useful, and I wonder if current IETF policies can accommodate that? Does anybody know where is the non-archival policy for drafts formally documented? Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 18:47:58 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA09574; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:47:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2HS4-0001p7-Jq; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:50:09 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2HKl-00039A-SN; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:42:35 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2HGw-00021G-T8 for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:38:38 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA09021 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:38:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2HIz-0001gN-K1 for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 18:40:47 -0400 Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7VMcX9d042230; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:38:33 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com) Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i7VMcXbs042229; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:38:33 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from rousskov) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:38:33 -0600 (MDT) From: Alex Rousskov To: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] WG draft work authorization In-Reply-To: <0I3C00MH20UF3A@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: <20040831163352.C20928@measurement-factory.com> References: <0I3C00MH20UF3A@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Larry Masinter wrote: > I think we should rank requirements by their importance and utility, On a "toolset MUST/SHOULD/MAY support" scale, IMO, the rank of the accept-draft-submissions-before-work-approval mode is a MAY. The rank of the approve-work-then-accept-submissions mode is a MUST. What ranks would you assign? Thanks, Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 19:16:45 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA11100; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:16:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2Htw-0002Dz-RU; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:18:57 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2HpG-0000O6-6R; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:14:06 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2HoO-0008Tg-7G for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:13:12 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA10872 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:13:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from av3-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net ([81.228.10.114]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2HqS-00029l-G6 for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:15:20 -0400 Received: by av3-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id AC95737ECE; Wed, 1 Sep 2004 01:12:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.182]) by av3-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C27F37E53; Wed, 1 Sep 2004 01:12:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (h195n1fls311o871.telia.com [213.64.174.195]) by smtp2-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E5537E45; Wed, 1 Sep 2004 01:12:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C2Hnm-0001Hi-5M; Wed, 01 Sep 2004 01:12:34 +0200 Message-ID: <413505E2.70005@levkowetz.com> Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 01:12:34 +0200 From: Henrik Levkowetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (Macintosh/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Allison Mankin Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cf3becbbd6d1a45acbe2ffd4ab88bdc2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: a8a20a483a84f747e56475e290ee868e Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Allison, And welcome back :-) Good input, below. Some comments also: Allison Mankin wrote: > Hi, everyone, > > I'm reading the mailing list carefully now that I'm back from my > way-too-disconnected vacation, and liking the discussion. > > But I want to point out a few things. They're mostly related to > the last day of messages. > > - Remember IETF has decided things such as the requirement for > the IPR statement on the drafts, so the Tools team/tool interface > isn't in the position to re-think that consensus. Ack. > - The IETF also has pretty formally decided that it cannot retain > old drafts, and so a tool can't change the actual repository policy > without getting into modifying the standards process. But I do > think a cvs-like and diff-supporting tool could be cool and > important. Yes. I realise that keeping the official repository as-is but setting up a cvs-like and diff-supporting tool may be walking dangerously close to the line here. But as doing diffs is infeasible if you don't have the previous version, and having a line of diffs will let you reconstruct expired drafts, we may need IESG sanction to set up such a mechanism, even if we don't change the working of the regular draft repository. > - Some things IETF hasn't formally decided, but a Tool framework > might formalize by accident: "membership" registration is an > example. Currently even chairs don't have to be consistent in what > email address they use for the very weak email-address authentication > we use for them. To the extent that we introduce authentication > and identity, they will be a significant change in the IETF, > where the only membership required is joining any mailing list. There've > been earlier parts of the thread that have talked about the several > authors verifying submission, and things like that. I think the farthest > this team could go on identity in the IETF as it exists now is to > authenticate chairs and editors (they are* covered by ISOC's liability > insurance). That's all you are talking about in the recent notes, but > just to be aware, because the same tool is for all the i-ds, > and more than half are non-working-group. Yes. I'd prefer all our authorization verification tools to be such that they left no permanent actor registry - which is one reason I like using mail roundtrip verification - it doesn't require any registry. > - I don't know if this has come up during phone calls: > There's a requirement for a fairly simple i-d submission tool to > offload mail-based submission as early as possible because of the > increasing loss patterns due to anti-spam tools interacting with > varied types of submissions. The detection of lost submissions has > not been perfect or always timely, and several working groups have > been quite badly affected by these problems. > > So if there are some harder to settle parts of the requirements, > if it's possible to put them in a second phase, that might be > desireable. Ok. I take that as a gentle way to ask us to speed this up, rather urgently :-) > Allison Now here: > P.S. about post-approval: some working groups have been editor-driven > or laissez faire so that the 00 is submitted and the working group > and chair have not been well aware. It used to be more common; > there were problem working group chairs in CCAMP to give you one > example where you can see a huge number of i-ds due to this > phenomenon. I wonder if there's a misunderstanding here - we're not even considering sanctioning a -00 that has been posted without proper approval - when we talk about post-approval, it's the case where a draft which has been properly accepted by the WG as a WG draft is submitted, an approval request is sent to the chair, and the chair OK's it -- as opposed to the case where the chair registers approval before the sumbission is done, and no additional approval request needs to be sent. If I've misunderstood and mistakenly thought there might be a misunderstanding at your end, I apologise :-) and instead wonder if you might clarify. Henrik _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 19:34:39 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA12297; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:34:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2IBG-0002W1-6C; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:36:51 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2I12-0002er-F5; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:26:16 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2HxM-00020m-JS for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:22:28 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA11381 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:22:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exprod6ob1.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.211] helo=psmtp.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2HzP-0002Ih-NU for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:24:37 -0400 Received: from source ([192.150.22.7]) by exprod6ob1.obsmtp.com ([12.158.35.250]) with SMTP; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:22:24 PDT Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (inner-relay-1 [153.32.1.51]) by smtp-relay-7.sea.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7VNMNNf022778; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:22:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from calsj-dev (calsj-dev.corp.adobe.com [153.32.1.193]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i7VNMNTk017715; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:22:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MasinterT40 (c-130-169.corp.adobe.com [153.32.130.169]) by mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0I3C003503LB0Z@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:22:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:22:23 -0700 From: Larry Masinter Subject: RE: [Tools-team] WG draft work authorization In-reply-to: <20040831163352.C20928@measurement-factory.com> To: "'Alex Rousskov'" Message-id: <0I3C003513LB0Z@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Thread-index: AcSPq0ClF56QDtmmSVKS+VMw8DN1pQABTmsg X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9466e0365fc95844abaf7c3f15a05c7d Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 97adf591118a232206bdb5a27b217034 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT > > I think we should rank requirements by their importance and utility, > > On a "toolset MUST/SHOULD/MAY support" scale, IMO, the rank of the > accept-draft-submissions-before-work-approval mode is a MAY. The rank > of the approve-work-then-accept-submissions mode is a MUST. > > What ranks would you assign? Between accept-draft-submission-before-work-approval and approve-work-then-accept-submission the tool MUST support one or the other of these, consistently. It MAY support both. It MAY support more complex modes of interaction, e.g., a WG chair asking to review the submission itself before approving it. It SHOULD have enforcable mechanisms for verification of email address, and the draft syntax validation SHOULD check to make sure the email address of the submitter is listed in the draft itself. Larry _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 19:54:54 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA13838; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:54:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2IUs-0002vW-2F; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:57:06 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2IMo-0007ls-QM; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:48:46 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2IIs-0006rK-CV for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:44:42 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA13294 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:44:39 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200408312344.TAA13294@ietf.org> Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2IKw-0002lq-7B for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:46:51 -0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=psg.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1C2IIq-000EsB-Cf; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 23:44:40 +0000 To: Alex Rousskov Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication In-Reply-To: Message from Alex Rousskov of "Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:31:30 MDT." <20040831162221.P20928@measurement-factory.com> Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:44:40 -0700 From: Allison Mankin X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081 Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 538aad3a3c4f01d8b6a6477ca4248793 Alex, > On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Allison Mankin wrote: > > > Hi, everyone, > > Hi Allison, > > It is nice to hear a fresh voice :-). Just one quick > clarification regarding your statement below, if I may. > > > - The IETF also has pretty formally decided that it cannot retain > > old drafts, and so a tool can't change the actual repository policy > > without getting into modifying the standards process. But I do > > think a cvs-like and diff-supporting tool could be cool and > > important. > > Do you think that archiving older versions until the latest draft > version expires would violate the above formal decision? Or, as a > minor variation, archiving all unexpired versions of a draft? > Providing an online "what has changed since I last checked" interface > would be very useful, and I wonder if current IETF policies can > accommodate that? I like the idea of a working set, but I'm not sure of the upshot... One idea would be for IESG (with input from the team) to propose the idea in one of the process experiment documents (draft-klensin-july14). The usefulness for working groups would ground the discussion. > > Does anybody know where is the non-archival policy for drafts formally > documented? What I've seen happen with this question is citation of the section on internet-drafts in RFC 2026, which fairly strongly implies no archiving because of the very specific way it treats i-d citation and because of its description of expiration. So it isn't formally *prohibited, but an IETF archive is impossible in the sense that the IETF policy defines i-ds as necessarily shortlived. > > Thanks, > > Alex. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 22:33:36 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA25230; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:33:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2KyS-0006BM-IN; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:35:48 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2Kub-0002ZE-RR; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:31:49 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2Kr8-0001aG-9x for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:28:14 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA24771 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:28:12 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200409010228.WAA24771@ietf.org> Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2KtB-00064Q-Fb for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:30:24 -0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=psg.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1C2Kr4-000CJ9-1W; Wed, 01 Sep 2004 02:28:10 +0000 To: Henrik Levkowetz Subject: Re: [Tools-team] Draft submission authentication In-Reply-To: Message from Henrik Levkowetz of "Wed, 01 Sep 2004 01:12:34 +0200." <413505E2.70005@levkowetz.com> Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:28:10 -0700 From: Allison Mankin X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 944ecb6e61f753561f559a497458fb4f Cc: tools-team@ietf.org X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Scan-Signature: c83ccb5cc10e751496398f1233ca9c3a > > And welcome back :-) Thanks! > > Ack. > > > - The IETF also has pretty formally decided that it cannot retain > > old drafts, and so a tool can't change the actual repository policy > > without getting into modifying the standards process. But I do > > think a cvs-like and diff-supporting tool could be cool and > > important. > > Yes. I realise that keeping the official repository as-is but setting > up a cvs-like and diff-supporting tool may be walking dangerously > close to the line here. But as doing diffs is infeasible if you don't > have the previous version, and having a line of diffs will let you > reconstruct expired drafts, we may need IESG sanction to set up > such a mechanism, even if we don't change the working of the regular > draft repository. I do see that. So my suggestion to Alex in my response to him was to have an explicit experimental process, using the "July 14" approach, acknowledging that there's a partial archive involved. > > > - Some things IETF hasn't formally decided, but a Tool framework > > might formalize by accident: "membership" registration is an > > example. Currently even chairs don't have to be consistent in what > > email address they use for the very weak email-address authentication > > we use for them. To the extent that we introduce authentication > > and identity, they will be a significant change in the IETF, > > where the only membership required is joining any mailing list. There've > > been earlier parts of the thread that have talked about the several > > authors verifying submission, and things like that. I think the farthest > > this team could go on identity in the IETF as it exists now is to > > authenticate chairs and editors (they are* covered by ISOC's liability > > insurance). That's all you are talking about in the recent notes, but > > just to be aware, because the same tool is for all the i-ds, > > and more than half are non-working-group. > > Yes. I'd prefer all our authorization verification tools to be such > that they left no permanent actor registry - which is one reason I > like using mail roundtrip verification - it doesn't require any > registry. Good. > > > - I don't know if this has come up during phone calls: > > There's a requirement for a fairly simple i-d submission tool to > > offload mail-based submission as early as possible because of the > > increasing loss patterns due to anti-spam tools interacting with > > varied types of submissions. The detection of lost submissions has > > not been perfect or always timely, and several working groups have > > been quite badly affected by these problems. > > > > So if there are some harder to settle parts of the requirements, > > if it's possible to put them in a second phase, that might be > > desireable. > > Ok. I take that as a gentle way to ask us to speed this up, rather > urgently :-) :) > > Now here: > > > P.S. about post-approval: some working groups have been editor-driven > > or laissez faire so that the 00 is submitted and the working group > > and chair have not been well aware. It used to be more common; > > there were problem working group chairs in CCAMP to give you one > > example where you can see a huge number of i-ds due to this > > phenomenon. > > I wonder if there's a misunderstanding here - we're not even considering > sanctioning a -00 that has been posted without proper approval - when we > talk about post-approval, it's the case where a draft which has been > properly accepted by the WG as a WG draft is submitted, an approval request > is sent to the chair, and the chair OK's it -- as opposed to the case where > the chair registers approval before the sumbission is done, and no > additional approval request needs to be sent. > > If I've misunderstood and mistakenly thought there might be a > misunderstanding at your end, I apologise :-) and instead wonder if > you might clarify. > I didn't mean to say you were sanctioning unapproved -00's, but rather I was pointing out that the current process/system has no checks on whether the WG has adopted them (or that they're chartered). If the WG Chair is not careful/scrupulous, the system is in trouble. IETF likes to add a lot of sunshine to such situations, so I think what might be good to see is a WG tracker that tracks how individual drafts are adopted by the working group, verified by the AD as within the charter (or added to the charter) and then approved as 00 items. Currently may not even be documentation of the WG adoption. Allison P.P.S. I'm back, but now I'll be mainly offline again for the next few days... for some travel for my day job. _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team From tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 31 22:45:26 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA25845; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:45:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2L9u-0006Lh-6l; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:47:39 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2L5I-0004ZZ-Gw; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:42:52 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C2L35-0003ya-0J for tools-team@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:40:35 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA25644 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:40:33 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200409010240.WAA25644@ietf.org> Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C2L5B-0006Hy-GO for tools-team@ietf.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:42:45 -0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=psg.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1C2L34-000Dvv-3y for tools-team@ietf.org; Wed, 01 Sep 2004 02:40:34 +0000 To: tools-team@ietf.org Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:40:34 -0700 From: Allison Mankin X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Subject: [Tools-team] Archive meant to be public? X-BeenThere: tools-team@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: mankin@psg.com List-Id: "The purpose of the TOOLS team is to provide IETF feedback and guidance during the development of software tools to support various parts of IETF activities." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: tools-team-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c Hi, Henrik, all, I just noticed that the tools-team archive is publically accessible. http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tools-team/current/maillist.html Did you want this? Allison _______________________________________________ Tools-team mailing list Tools-team@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-team