Subject: [datatracker-rqmts] Fwd: draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-iana-rfced-extns requirements questions

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:55:41 -0500

and of course my mail program remembered the typo in the list name for me :(...
Resending to get this to the list as well.

RjS

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
> Date: March 14, 2011 4:56:49 PM CDT
> To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
> Subject: draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-iana-rfced-extns requirements questions
> 
> Hi Sandy, Michelle, and Alexa -
> 
> As the datatracker-iana-rfced document is refined, I think it would help to be
> more explicit about what you want to be machine-machine automated between
> the datatracker and the IANA and RFC Editor systems, and what you expect to
> remain as manual entry.
> 
> Every bit of information in the tracker that is a copy of information that is authoritatively
> kept somewhere else is a presents an opportunity for error, and a need for automated
> consistency checking and (often manual) reconciliation. Would it be feasible to build
> an interface across the systems that would let the tracker ask for the authoritative information
> when it needed it to respond to a request, rather than rely on a having a duplicate of that information
> entered into the tracker's databases? (We could, of course, look at caching the results of such
> a query).
> 
> As I asked Paul in response to the LC of the genart-datatracker-community document, how
> much of the discrepancy seeking reporting do you think you could achieve with the dynamic
> list feature being required there (if the ability to compare against state values were added)?
> 
> RjS