draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-community-06.txt   draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-community-07.txt 
Network Working Group P. Hoffman Network Working Group P. Hoffman
Internet-Draft VPN Consortium Internet-Draft VPN Consortium
Intended status: Informational February 22, 2011 Intended status: Informational March 31, 2011
Expires: August 26, 2011 Expires: October 2, 2011
Requirements for Internet-Draft Tracking by the IETF Community in the Requirements for Internet-Draft Tracking by the IETF Community in the
Datatracker Datatracker
draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-community-06 draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-community-07
Abstract Abstract
The document gives a set of requirements for extending the IETF The document gives a set of requirements for extending the IETF
Datatracker to give individual IETF community members, including the Datatracker to give individual IETF community members, including the
IETF leadership, easy methods for tracking the progress of the IETF leadership, easy methods for tracking the progress of the
Internet-Drafts and RFCs of interest to them. Internet-Drafts and RFCs of interest to them.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 34 skipping to change at page 1, line 34
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 26, 2011. This Internet-Draft will expire on October 2, 2011.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 34 skipping to change at page 2, line 34
2.1.6. Requirement: Adding groups of I-Ds to a list by 2.1.6. Requirement: Adding groups of I-Ds to a list by
attribute must be simple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 attribute must be simple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.1.7. Requirement: Private information must not be 2.1.7. Requirement: Private information must not be
exposed in lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 exposed in lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2. Notifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.2. Notifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.1. Requirement: Users can be notified when an I-D 2.2.1. Requirement: Users can be notified when an I-D
changes status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 changes status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.2. Requirement: Every list has Atom feeds associated 2.2.2. Requirement: Every list has Atom feeds associated
with it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 with it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.3. Requirement: Every list has mail streams 2.2.3. Requirement: Every list has mail streams
associated with it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 associated with it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2.4. Requirement: Notifications need to specify which 2.2.4. Requirement: Notifications need to specify which
list caused the notification . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 list caused the notification . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3. Display in the Datatracker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.3. Display in the Datatracker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.1. Requirement: Users can define their Datatracker 2.3.1. Requirement: Users can define their Datatracker
document view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 document view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.2. Requirement: Users can choose which attributes to 2.3.2. Requirement: Users can choose which attributes to
display . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 display . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3.3. Requirement: Users can flag I-Ds with dates in the 2.3.3. Requirement: Users can flag I-Ds with dates in the
future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3.4. Requirement: Users can specify highlighting of 2.3.4. Requirement: Users can specify highlighting of
skipping to change at page 4, line 19 skipping to change at page 4, line 19
that meet particular criteria. The current Datatracker, found at that meet particular criteria. The current Datatracker, found at
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/>, allows anyone to search for active <https://datatracker.ietf.org/>, allows anyone to search for active
I-Ds and RFCs, and get a list matching the given criteria. (The I-Ds and RFCs, and get a list matching the given criteria. (The
Datatracker also allows for expired I-Ds, but those are not relevant Datatracker also allows for expired I-Ds, but those are not relevant
to this discussion.) to this discussion.)
Users can search in the Datatracker by the filename of the I-D, words Users can search in the Datatracker by the filename of the I-D, words
in the I-D title, I-D author list, associated Working Group (WG), in the I-D title, I-D author list, associated Working Group (WG),
IETF area, the responsible Area Director (AD), or IESG status. They IETF area, the responsible Area Director (AD), or IESG status. They
can search for RFCs by number or words in the title. The returned can search for RFCs by number or words in the title. The returned
list of I-Ds and/or RFCs includes five columns: filename or RFC list of I-Ds and/or RFCs includes sixTestVM columns: filename or RFC
number (with an active link to an HTMLized version maintained by the number (with an active link to an HTMLized version maintained by the
IETF tools team), the document's title, the date it was published, IETF tools team), the document's title, the date it was published,
its status in the IETF or RFC process, and the responsible AD (if its status in the IETF or RFC process, IPR statements, and the
any). For example, the output of a search in the current Datatracker responsible AD (if any). For example, the output of a search in the
can be seen at <http://imgur.com/DD3AL>. current Datatracker can be seen at <http://imgur.com/DD3AL>. [[ Note
to RFC Editor: Please remve the preceding sentence ("For example,
...") before publication. ]]
Instead of using the search capability of the Datatracker to manually Instead of using the search capability of the Datatracker to manually
find I-Ds and RFCs of interest, users might want to create a list of find I-Ds and RFCs of interest, users might want to create a list of
I-Ds that they normally follow. Some users will want to keep their I-Ds that they normally follow. Some users will want to keep their
list to themselves, but others will want to allow others to view list to themselves, but others will want to allow others to view
their list. their list.
Different users in the IETF community will have different ways that Different users in the IETF community will have different ways that
they want to get information on I-D and RFC updates and status. Many they want to get information on I-D and RFC updates and status. Many
users will want to be notified immediately, such as through an Atom users will want to be notified immediately, such as through an Atom
skipping to change at page 6, line 30 skipping to change at page 6, line 33
An "attribute" is a feature of an I-D or RFC, such as its filename or An "attribute" is a feature of an I-D or RFC, such as its filename or
RFC number, its current state in the IETF or RFC process, and so on. RFC number, its current state in the IETF or RFC process, and so on.
Attributes are usually displayed as columns in the Datatracker. Attributes are usually displayed as columns in the Datatracker.
A "row" is a set of attributes about a single I-D or RFC that is A "row" is a set of attributes about a single I-D or RFC that is
displayed in the Datatracker. displayed in the Datatracker.
A "significant change in status" is all approvals and disposition of A "significant change in status" is all approvals and disposition of
an I-D. Assuming that the changes to the Datatracker specified in an I-D. Assuming that the changes to the Datatracker specified in
[WGSTATES] and [ALTSTREAMS] are made, "all approvals" means the [RFC6174], [RFC6175] and [ALTSTREAMS] are made, "all approvals" means
following: the following:
o IETF stream: the WG states "Adopted by a WG", "In WG Last Call", o IETF stream: the WG states "Adopted by a WG", "In WG Last Call",
"WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-up", "Parked WG document", and "WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-up", "Parked WG document", and
"Dead WG document"; the IESG states "Publication Requested", "In "Dead WG document"; the IESG states "Publication Requested", "In
Last Call", and "IESG Evaluation" Last Call", "IESG Evaluation", and "Sent to the RFC Editor"
o IAB stream: "Active IAB Document", "Community Review", and "Sent o IAB stream: "Active IAB Document", "Community Review", and "Sent
to the RFC Editor" to the RFC Editor"
o IRTF stream: "Active RG Document", "In RG Last Call", "Awaiting o IRTF stream: "Active RG Document", "In RG Last Call", "Awaiting
IRSG Reviews", "In IESG Review", "Sent to the RFC Editor", and IRSG Reviews", "In IESG Review", "Sent to the RFC Editor", and
"Document on Hold Based On IESG Request" "Document on Hold Based On IESG Request"
o ISE stream: "Submission Received", "In ISE Review", "In IESG o ISE stream: "Submission Received", "In ISE Review", "In IESG
Review", "Sent to the RFC Editor", and "Document on Hold Based On Review", "Sent to the RFC Editor", and "Document on Hold Based On
IESG Request" IESG Request"
o All streams: in addition to the above, the disposition states o All streams: in addition to the above, the disposition states
"Approved", "RFC Published", and "Dead" are also included "Approved", "RFC Published", and "Dead" are also included
An "update to an RFC" is the announcement of a newer RFC that updates An "update to an RFC" is the announcement of a newer RFC that updates
or obsoletes the base RFC, or an announcement of an errata posted for or obsoletes the base RFC, an in-place change to the RFC's maturity
the base RFC. level, the RFC's status being changed to historic, or an announcement
of an errata posted for the base RFC.
1.4. Expected user interactions 1.4. Expected user interactions
When a user wants to follow a group of I-Ds and/or RFCs, he or she When a user wants to follow a group of I-Ds and/or RFCs, he or she
goes to the Datatracker and creates a new list. The requirements for goes to the Datatracker and creates a new list. The requirements for
lists are given in Section 2.1. After a list is created, the user lists are given in Section 2.1. After a list is created, the user
has three ways that he or she might see when I-Ds and/or RFCs in the has three ways that he or she might see when I-Ds and/or RFCs in the
list are updated: list are updated:
o By going to the Datatracker page for the list (see Section 2.3) o By going to the Datatracker page for the list (see Section 2.3)
skipping to change at page 7, line 31 skipping to change at page 7, line 37
and reading the mail stream in their mail reader and reading the mail stream in their mail reader
1.5. Discussion of These Requirements 1.5. Discussion of These Requirements
[[ This section is to be removed before the RFC is published. ]] [[ This section is to be removed before the RFC is published. ]]
This document is being discussed on the datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org This document is being discussed on the datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org
mailing list. For more information, see mailing list. For more information, see
<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/datatracker-rqmts>. <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/datatracker-rqmts>.
There will probably be virtual interim meetings to discuss this
document in early 2011.
2. Requirements for Tools Features 2. Requirements for Tools Features
This section defines the requirements for the tool described earlier This section defines the requirements for the tool described earlier
in this document. The eventual tool, if implemented, may have more in this document. The eventual tool, if implemented, may have more
features than are listed here; however, before this document is features than are listed here; however, before this document is
finished, it should contain as many requirements as possible upon finished, it should contain as many requirements as possible upon
which the IETF community can agree. which the IETF community can agree.
2.1. Lists 2.1. Lists
skipping to change at page 11, line 29 skipping to change at page 11, line 34
subscribe to multiple lists, this requirement will at least suggest subscribe to multiple lists, this requirement will at least suggest
to them that they want to limit their overlapping subscriptions.) to them that they want to limit their overlapping subscriptions.)
2.3. Display in the Datatracker 2.3. Display in the Datatracker
2.3.1. Requirement: Users can define their Datatracker document view 2.3.1. Requirement: Users can define their Datatracker document view
There are many ways that a user might want to see the Datatracker's There are many ways that a user might want to see the Datatracker's
HTML view of a list. For example, a user might want the view HTML view of a list. For example, a user might want the view
displayed in alphabetical order by the I-Ds' filenames and RFC displayed in alphabetical order by the I-Ds' filenames and RFC
numbers, but after the user is of the net for a week, he or she might numbers, but after the user is off the net for a week, he or she
want the view displayed in order of changes of status so that those might want the view displayed in order of changes of status so that
I-Ds and RFCs changed recently appear at the top. those I-Ds and RFCs changed recently appear at the top.
The default is to first list the groups first in alphabetical order
by group name, then single I-Ds in alphabetical order by I-D
filename, with RFCs at the end. When displaying a list, the
Datatracker should allow easy sorting of the I-Ds with the following
collation orders:
o Alphabetical order by group name followed by single I-Ds and RFCs The default is to list I-Ds in alphabetical order by I-D filename,
(default) with RFCs at the end. When displaying a list, the Datatracker should
allow easy sorting of the I-Ds with the following collation orders:
o Alphabetical by I-D filename and RFC number o Alphabetical by I-D filename and RFC number
o Alphabetical by document title o Alphabetical by document title
o Alphabetical by associated WG o Alphabetical by associated WG
o Date of publication of current version of the document o Date of publication of current version of the document
o Date of most recent change of status of any type o Date of most recent change of status of any type
skipping to change at page 12, line 31 skipping to change at page 12, line 31
There are many attributes that might be displayed, and different There are many attributes that might be displayed, and different
users will have different information that they want to see. Also, users will have different information that they want to see. Also,
users will have different display technologies: someone might users will have different display technologies: someone might
normally use a web browser on a large screen, but at other times use normally use a web browser on a large screen, but at other times use
the browser on their phone. the browser on their phone.
Choosing which attributes should be displayed should be simple for Choosing which attributes should be displayed should be simple for
the user. The Datatracker should save the last-chosen set of the user. The Datatracker should save the last-chosen set of
attributes for display with the definition of the list. The default attributes for display with the definition of the list. The default
is to display is I-D filename or RFC number, document title, date of is to display the I-D filename or RFC number, document title, date of
current I-D or RFC publication date, status in the RFC stream or RFC current I-D or RFC publication date, status in the RFC stream or RFC
process, associated WG or RG, whether it was changed within the last process, associated WG or RG, whether it was changed within the last
7 days, and included list(s) which contain this I-D. 7 days, and included list(s) which contain this I-D.
The Datatracker should support display of the following attributes: The Datatracker should support display of the following attributes:
o I-D filename o I-D filename
o I-D title o I-D title
skipping to change at page 15, line 14 skipping to change at page 15, line 14
Hoffman, P., "Requirements for a Working Group Charter Hoffman, P., "Requirements for a Working Group Charter
Tool", draft-ietf-genarea-charter-tool (work in progress), Tool", draft-ietf-genarea-charter-tool (work in progress),
October 2010. October 2010.
[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996. 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
[RFC4287] Nottingham, M., Ed. and R. Sayre, Ed., "The Atom [RFC4287] Nottingham, M., Ed. and R. Sayre, Ed., "The Atom
Syndication Format", RFC 4287, December 2005. Syndication Format", RFC 4287, December 2005.
[WGSTATES] [RFC6174] Juskevicius, E., "Definition of IETF Working Group
Juskevicius, E., "Definition of IETF Working Group Document States", RFC 6174, March 2011.
Document States", draft-ietf-proto-wgdocument-states (work
in progress), October 2010. [RFC6175] Juskevicius, E., "Requirements to Extend the Datatracker
for IETF Working Group Chairs and Authors", RFC 6175,
March 2011.
Appendix A. Possible Tracking of Other Documents Appendix A. Possible Tracking of Other Documents
It is not at all clear if any of these will be a requirement, a later It is not at all clear if any of these will be a requirement, a later
requirement, or a non-requirement. Further, even if one or more of requirement, or a non-requirement. Further, even if one or more of
these non-I-D items is made a requirement, it is not clear whether these non-I-D items is made a requirement, it is not clear whether
they will be included in the same lists with I-Ds. That is, if they will be included in the same lists with I-Ds. That is, if
tracking IANA registry changes are considered a requirement, it is tracking IANA registry changes are considered a requirement, it is
not clear whether a user would include the registries in a list that not clear whether a user would include the registries in a list that
also contains I-Ds, or whether they would need to create two lists, also contains I-Ds, or whether they would need to create two lists,
skipping to change at page 17, line 5 skipping to change at page 17, line 5
desired, it was decided that implementing this in a safe and desired, it was decided that implementing this in a safe and
understandable way would be too difficult. In particular, there understandable way would be too difficult. In particular, there
was a concern about detecting and handling loops. Later versions was a concern about detecting and handling loops. Later versions
of the Datatracker might include this feature. of the Datatracker might include this feature.
o In public lists, it might be useful for someone to be able to o In public lists, it might be useful for someone to be able to
understand why particular I-Ds and/or groups are added. Allowing understand why particular I-Ds and/or groups are added. Allowing
the user who put together the list to add a comment field would the user who put together the list to add a comment field would
help someone else see the motivation. help someone else see the motivation.
o The Datatracker might cull lists if it seems that storing them on o The Datatracker might remove lists if it seems that storing them
the Datatracker is taking too many resources. The Datatracker can on the Datatracker is taking too many resources. The Datatracker
periodically send mail to the user reminding them to delete lists can periodically send mail to the user reminding them to delete
that are no longer needed. lists that are no longer needed.
o The normal Datatracker display could have a button to add a o The normal Datatracker display could have a button to add a
particular I-D to the user's personal list. particular I-D to the user's personal list.
o Allow each user to determine what "significant change in status" o Allow each user to determine what "significant change in status"
is for the list they create. This could be done by a series of is for the list they create. This could be done by a series of
check boxes for every possible status change. check boxes for every possible status change.
o A list creator can add a list-level comment about who might be o A list creator can add a list-level comment about who might be
interested in following the list. interested in following the list.
 End of changes. 15 change blocks. 
37 lines changed or deleted 34 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/