Network Working Group P. Hoffman
Internet-Draft VPN Consortium
Intended status: Informational August 19, 2010
Expires: February 20, 2011
Data Tracker States and Annotations for the IAB, IRTF, and Independent
Submission Streams
draft-hoffman-alt-streams-tracker-06
Abstract
This document describes extending the IETF Data Tracker to capture
and display the progression of Internet Drafts that are intended to
be published as RFCs by the IAB, IRTF, or Independent Submissions
Editor. The states and annotations that are to be added to the data
tracker will be applied to a draft as soon as any of these streams
identify the draft as a potential eventual RFC, and will continue
through the lifetime of the draft. The goal of adding this
information to the Data Tracker is to give the community more
information about the status of these drafts and the status of the
streams themselves.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 20, 2011.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
Hoffman Expires February 20, 2011 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft States for Alternate Streams August 2010
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
Contributions published or made publicly available before November
10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English.
1. Introduction
This document was prepared in coordination with the IAB, IRTF, and
ISE streams, at the request of the IAOC.
As described in Section 5 of [RFC4844], there are currently four
streams that feed into the RFC publication process: the IETF document
stream, the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) document stream, the
Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) document stream, and the
Independent Submissions stream which is administered by the
Independent Submissions Editor (ISE). Each of these streams consist
of Internet Drafts (often abbreviated "I-Ds") that have been
identified by an organization or role as being part of their stream.
Each stream maintainer progresses documents towards RFC publication
in its own fashion.
In recent years, there has been a desire by IETF participants and
others to see more of the process used by each stream. For example,
some people want to know how close the IAB is to finishing a
particular document; IETF participants might want to know the
progress of IRTF research documents that are in areas that are
related to their engineering work; people who have asked for the ISE
to publish their document want to track its progress. If the IETF
Data Tracker ("tracker") has more information about each stream's
states, this information is much more easily accessible.
This document describes the additional tracker states that are
specific to each of the IAB, the IRTF, and the ISE document flows. A
Hoffman Expires February 20, 2011 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft States for Alternate Streams August 2010
document might also have one or more annotations assigned as well.
Because each stream is controlled by a different organization, this
document separates out the proposed states and annotations for each
stream, and associates specific semantics stream-by-stream.
Annotations may be applied at any time to a document that is intended
for the particular stream. A document may have more than one
annotation applied to it. It is likely that the comments for these
annotations will supply valuable information about the annotation.
Each stream owner needs to have write access to the states and
annotations for all the documents in their stream. They should also
be able to assign others to have the same write privileges.
This document does not describe which person in each stream might be
able to edit these states and annotations; it is assumed that this is
a simple enough task that it can be negotiated between each stream
administrator and whoever administers the tracker. Also, this
document assumes that whoever is making the edits to the state and
annotations can enter comments that will be publicly visible.
Some streams have comments that are very long, such as document
reviews and poll about the document. The tracker needs to be able to
store long annotations.
Note that this document does not discuss documents in the IETF
stream. The states and permissions for IETF stream documents that
have been requested for publication are already implemented in the
tracker. A separate set of documents, [WGSTATES] and
[WGREQUIREMENTS], describe the tracker states and associated
permissions proposed for documents in the IETF stream that have been
adopted, or are being considered for adoption, by IETF Working
Groups.
2. IAB Stream
This section describes the desired states and annotations for the IAB
stream.
2.1. States for the IAB Stream
o Candidate IAB Document -- This document is written or edited by an
IAB member who wants the IAB to consider it for the IAB stream.
o Active IAB Document -- This document has been adopted by the IAB
and is being actively developed.
Hoffman Expires February 20, 2011 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft States for Alternate Streams August 2010
o Parked IAB Document -- This document has lost its author or
editor, is waiting for another document to be written, or cannot
currently be worked on by the IAB for some other reason.
Annotations probably explain why this document is parked.
o IAB Review -- This document is awaiting the IAB itself to come to
internal consensus.
o Community Review -- This document has completed internal consensus
within the IAB and is now under community review. (The IAB
normally allows community input during earlier stages of the
process as well.)
o Approved by IAB, To Be Sent to RFC Editor -- The consideration of
this document is complete, but it has not yet been sent to the RFC
Editor for publication (although that is going to happen soon).
o Sent to a Different Organization for Publication -- The IAB does
not expect to publish the document itself, but has passed it on to
a different organization that might continue work on the document.
The expectation is that other organization will publish the
eventual document.
o Sent to the RFC Editor -- The IAB processing of this document is
complete and it has been sent to the RFC Editor for publication.
The document may be in the RFC Editor's queue, or it may have been
published as an RFC; this state doesn't distinguish between
different states occurring after the document has left the IAB.
o Published RFC -- The document was published as an RFC. This state
will list the number of the RFC and the publication date.
o Dead IAB Document -- This document was an active IAB document, but
for some reason it is no longer being pursued for the IAB stream.
It is possible that the document might be revived later.
2.2. Annotations for the IAB Stream
o Editor Needed -- The document has lost its editor but it is still
intended to be part of the IAB stream.
o Waiting for Dependency on Other Document -- Activity on this
document is expected to be low or non-existent while waiting for
another document (probably listed in the comments) progresses.
o Waiting for Partner Feedback -- The IAB often produces documents
that need socializing with outside organisations (such as the
IEEE) or other internal organisations (such as the IESG or the
Hoffman Expires February 20, 2011 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft States for Alternate Streams August 2010
IAOC). This document has been sent out for feedback from one of
these partner groups.
o Awaiting Reviews -- Activity on this document is expected to be
low or non-existent while waiting for reviews that were solicited
by the IAB.
o Revised I-D Needed -- Comments that will cause changes have been
submitted, and no processing is expected until a new draft is
issued.
o Document Shepherd Followup -- The document's shepherd is expected
to take some action before the document can proceed.
3. IRTF Stream
This section describes the desired states and annotations for the
IRTF stream. Some of the steps take place in IRTF Research Groups
(RGs), while others take place in the Internet Research Steering
Group (IRSG).
3.1. States for the IRTF Stream
o Candidate RG Document -- This document is under consideration in
an RG for becoming a IRTF document. A document being in this
state does not imply any RG consensus, and does not imply any
precedence or selection. It's simply a way to indicate that
somebody has asked for a document to be considered for adoption by
an RG.
o Active RG Document -- This document has been adopted by an RG, and
is being actively developed.
o Parked RG Document -- This document has lost its author or editor,
is waiting for another document to be written, or cannot currently
be worked on by the RG that adopted it for some other reason.
o In RG Last Call -- The document is in its final review in the RG.
o Waiting for Document Shepherd -- IRTF documents have document
shepherds who help RG documents through the process after the RG
has finished with the document.
o Waiting for IRTF Chair -- The IRTF Chair is meant to be performing
some task such as sending a request for IESG Review.
Hoffman Expires February 20, 2011 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft States for Alternate Streams August 2010
o Awaiting IRSG Reviews -- The document shepherd has taken the
document to the IRSG and solicited reviews from one or more IRSG
members.
o In IRSG Poll -- The IRSG is taking a poll on whether or not the
document is ready to be published.
o In IESG Review -- The IRSG has asked the IESG to do an review of
the document, as described in [RFC5742].
o Sent to the RFC Editor -- The document has been submitted for
publication (and not returned to the IRTF for further action).
The document may be in the RFC Editor's queue, or it may have been
published as an RFC; this state doesn't distinguish between
different states occurring after the document has left the IRTF.
o Document on Hold Based On IESG Request -- The IESG has requested
that the document be held pending further review, as specified in
RFC5742, and the IRTF has agreed to such a hold.
o Published RFC -- The document was published as an RFC. This state
will list the number of the RFC and the publication date.
o Dead IRTF Document -- This document was an active IRTF document,
but for some reason it is no longer being pursued for the IRTF
stream. It is possible that the document might be revived later,
possibly in another stream.
3.2. Annotations for the IRTF Stream
o Editor Needed -- The document has lost its editor but it still
intended to be the output of an RG.
o Shepherd Needed -- The document needs a shepherd assigned to it.
o Waiting for Dependency on Other Document -- Activity on this
document is expected to be low or non-existent while waiting for
another document (probably listed in the comments) progresses.
o Revised I-D Needed -- Discussion has ensued that is expected to
cause changes, and no progress is expected until a new draft is
issued.
3.3. Access Control for IRTF States and Annotations
An RG Chair needs to be able to set the states and annotations for an
IRTF document before the RG has sent the document to the IRSG for
review. The RG Chair also needs to be able to give the same ability
Hoffman Expires February 20, 2011 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft States for Alternate Streams August 2010
to a shepherd that is assigned by the RG chair. This access control
is similar to the access control that is specified in
[WGREQUIREMENTS] for IETF WG chairs and their document shepherds.
The RG chairs should be able to modify the state and annotations for
any of that RG's documents at any time. The IRTF Chair should be
able to modify the state and annotations for any IRTF Stream document
at any time.
RG chairs and document shepherds may change at any point in a
document's life cycle. The Data Tracker needs to be able to make
these changes, and also needs to log these changes when they are
made.
4. Independent Submission Stream
This section describes the desired states and annotations for the
Independent Submission stream. The ISE will do his or her own
record-keeping for data not related to states and annotations.
Many documents in the Independent Submission stream come from the
other three streams. Because of this, the tracker needs to preserve
previous states and annotations on drafts that come to the
Independent Submission stream.
4.1. States for the Independent Submission Stream
o Submission Received -- The draft has been sent to the ISE with a
request for publication.
o Finding Reviewers -- The ISE is finding initial reviewers for the
document.
o In ISE Review -- The ISE is actively working on the document.
o New Version Requested -- One or more reviews have been sent to the
author(s), and the ISE is awaiting response.
o In IESG Review -- The ISE has asked the IESG to do a review on the
document, as described in [RFC5742].
o Sent to the RFC Editor -- The ISE processing of this document is
complete and it has been sent to the RFC Editor for publication.
The document may be in the RFC Editor's queue, or it may have been
published as an RFC; this state doesn't distinguish between
different states occurring after the document has left the ISE.
Hoffman Expires February 20, 2011 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft States for Alternate Streams August 2010
o Published RFC -- The document was published as an RFC. This state
will list the number of the RFC and the publication date.
o No Longer In Independent Submission Stream -- This document was
actively considered in the Independent Submission stream, but the
ISE chose not to publish it. It is possible that the document
might be revived later.
4.2. Annotations for the Independent Submission Stream
o Waiting for Dependency on Other Document -- Activity on this
document is expected to be low or non-existent while waiting for
another document (probably listed in the comments) progresses.
The other documents may or may not be in the Independent
Submission stream.
o Awaiting Reviews -- Activity on this document is expected to be
low or non-existent while waiting for reviews that were solicited
by the ISE.
o Revised I-D Needed -- Requests for revisions have been sent to the
author(s), and no further ISE processing is expected until a new
draft is issued.
o IESG Review Completed -- The IESG has completed its review on the
document, as described in [RFC5742].
5. Display in the Data Tracker
When the Data Tracker displays the metadata for an individual draft
in the IAB stream, IRTF stream, or ISE stream, it should show at
least the following information:
Hoffman Expires February 20, 2011 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft States for Alternate Streams August 2010
Document stream: IAB / IRTF / Independent Submission
I-D availability status: Active / Expired / Withdrawn / RFC
Replaces / Replaced I-D or RFC
(if applicable)
Last updated: year-mm-dd (e.g. 2010-07-25)
IRTF RG status: * Applicable RG state *and* name of
RG (or RGs)
Intended RFC status: Informational / Experimental / etc.
Document shepherd: ** Name of Document Shepherd (if assigned)
Approval status: Name of applicable state from the IAB /
IRTF / Independent Submission stream
* The "IRTF RG status" is only shown for the IRTF stream; it is to
be completely removed for the IAB and Independent Stream
** This field displays the name and email of the person assigned to
be the shepherd for the I-D; the line is omitted if the shepherd
has not yet been assigned
6. Movement Between RFC Streams
Internet Drafts sometimes move between RFC streams. For example, a
draft might start out in the IETF stream but then move to the
Independent Submission stream, or a draft might move from an IRTF RG
to the IETF stream. Thus, the IETF Data Tracker needs to be able to
change the designated stream of a draft. It is expected that this
will be done by the stream managers. In addtion, the IETF Data
Tracker should preserve all data from the earlier stream(s) when a
document moves between streams.
New RFC streams may be added in the future, and the tool needs to be
able to handle additional streams.
7. IANA Considerations
None.
8. Security Considerations
Changing the states in the Data Tracker does not affect the security
of the Internet in any significant fashion.
9. Review of These Requirements
[[[ This section is not final and is pending agreement from the three
Hoffman Expires February 20, 2011 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft States for Alternate Streams August 2010
streams. ]]]
The IAB has reviewed this document, and agrees that this document
meets the IAB's consent requirements.
The IRTF Chair has reviewed this document and agrees that this
document meets the requirements for the IRTF stream.
The ISE has reviewed this document and agrees that this document
meets the requirements of the technical community, as represented by
the Independent Submission stream.
10. Acknowledgements
This document draws heavily on, including wholesale copying from,
earlier work done by Henrik Levkowetz, Phil Roberts, and Aaron Falk.
Additional significant input has been received from Aaron Falk, Nevil
Brownlee, Olaf Kolkman, Ross Callon, Ed Juskevicius, Subramanian SM
Moonesamy, and Alfred Hoenes.
11. References
11.1. Normative References
[RFC4844] Daigle, L. and Internet Architecture Board, "The RFC
Series and RFC Editor", RFC 4844, July 2007.
11.2. Informative References
[RFC5742] Alvestrand, H. and R. Housley, "IESG Procedures for
Handling of Independent and IRTF Stream Submissions",
BCP 92, RFC 5742, December 2009.
[WGREQUIREMENTS]
Juskevicius, E., "Requirements to Extend the Datatracker
for WG Chairs and Authors",
draft-juskevicius-datatracker-wgdocstate-reqts (work in
progress), May 2010.
[WGSTATES]
Juskevicius, E., "Definition of IETF Working Group
Document States", draft-ietf-proto-wgdocument-states (work
in progress), May 2010.
Hoffman Expires February 20, 2011 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft States for Alternate Streams August 2010
Author's Address
Paul Hoffman
VPN Consortium
Email: paul.hoffman@vpnc.org
Hoffman Expires February 20, 2011 [Page 11]