Requirements for Internet-Draft Tracking by the IETF Community in the Datatracker
draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-community-08
Yes
(Robert Sparks)
(Ron Bonica)
(Russ Housley)
No Objection
(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Pete Resnick)
(Peter Saint-Andre)
(Ralph Droms)
(Stephen Farrell)
(Stewart Bryant)
(Wesley Eddy)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 08 and is now closed.
Robert Sparks Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Russ Housley Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2011-04-14)
Unknown
I have no objection to the publication of this document. There were three requirement-oriented thoughts I had on this most recent reading... --- As a requirement for an implementor, I found 2.1.1. "Requirement: Lists of I-Ds and RFCs can be large" to be too vague. Is it saying that a hard coded limit is OK provided it supports "hundreds of I-Ds and dozens of RFCs"? Would it not be better to specifically reuqire "no implementation limit" to list size? --- I don't find 2.1.2 sufficiently clear. It says "Every Datatracker user can create a list." It does not say whether the limit is one list per user. I have no feeling either way, but I feel the document should be clear as it will significantly impact implementation. --- Did I miss notification of changes to a list (not of changes to I-Ds in a list)? I can consider: - I-D / RFC added to list - I-D / RFC removed from list - list deleted
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2011-04-12)
Unknown
1. Section 1.1: This would include not only I-Ds that are in the many WGs that directly are changing the DNS (DNSEXT, DNSOP, BEHAVE, and so on), but also individual submissions, IAB I-Ds, and even IRTF research. s/IRTF research/IRTF I-Ds/ 2. Section 1.2 the ability to get notifications when individual I-Ds from a list changes state s/changes/change/ 3. Section 1.3 What is the difference between "Approved" and "Sent to the RFC Editor"? 4. Section 2.3.2 o Associated WG or RG I think this needs to be o Associated WG or RG or IAB or IES
Gonzalo Camarillo Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2011-04-14)
Unknown
I'm just wondering if there is any existing web technology that would allow someone to express an interest in a objects satisfying a certain criteria, and get updates, etc. accordingly. It seems funny that we need to build specific tools for our small database of drafts and tracker events. But what do I know, I'm just a poor little IP layer guy :-)
Pete Resnick Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Peter Saint-Andre Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ralph Droms Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Sean Turner Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2011-04-12)
Unknown
Sec 1: r/sixTestVM/six Sec 2.3.1: I think "be" is missing from the following: In displays, a particular I-D or RFC should only *be* included once Sec 2.3.3: r/changes/changed in: has not changes state
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Stewart Bryant Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Wesley Eddy Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown