draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-iana-rfced-extns-00.txt   draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-iana-rfced-extns-01.txt 
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) S. Ginoza Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) S. Ginoza
Internet-Draft AMS Internet-Draft AMS
Intended Status: Informational M. Cotton Intended Status: Informational M. Cotton
Expires: August 25, 2011 ICANN Expires: October 14, 2011 ICANN
A. Morris A. Morris
AMS AMS
February 25, 2011 April 14, 2011
Datatracker Extensions to Datatracker Extensions to
Include IANA and RFC Editor Processing Information Include IANA and RFC Editor Processing Information
<draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-iana-rfced-extns-00.txt> <draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-iana-rfced-extns-01.txt>
Abstract Abstract
This document captures the requirements for integrating IANA and RFC This document captures the requirements for integrating IANA and RFC
Editor state information into the Datatracker to provide the Editor state information into the Datatracker to provide the
community with a unified tool to track the status of their document community with a unified tool to track the status of their document
as it progresses from Internet-Draft (I-D) version -00 to RFC. as it progresses from Internet-Draft (I-D) version -00 to RFC.
Extending the Datatracker to hold document data from I-D version -00 Extending the Datatracker to hold document data from I-D version -00
to RFC allows for increased automation between the Datatracker, IANA, to RFC allows for increased automation between the Datatracker, IANA,
and RFC Editor, thus reducing manual labor, processing errors, and and RFC Editor, thus reducing manual labor, processing errors, and
skipping to change at page 2, line 42 skipping to change at page 2, line 42
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The IETF Datatracker is a web-based system for managing information The IETF Datatracker is a web-based system for managing information
about Internet-Drafts (I-Ds) and RFCs, IPR disclosures, liaison about Internet-Drafts (I-Ds) and RFCs, IPR disclosures, liaison
statements, and several other important aspects of the document statements, and several other important aspects of the document
process [IDTRACKER]. process [IDTRACKER].
The Datatracker is used to report on the status of I-Ds that have The Datatracker is used to report on the status of I-Ds that have
been submitted to the IESG for evaluation and publication. The been submitted to the IESG for evaluation and publication. The
Datatracker will be extended, according to the requirements defined Datatracker will be extended, according to the requirements defined
in [WGDOCUMENT-STATES] and [ALT-STREAMS], to include tracking in [RFC6174] and [ALT-STREAMS], to include tracking information about
information about a document during its progression from version -00 a document during its progression from version -00 to it being
to it being requested for IESG evaluation. However, the Datatracker, requested for IESG evaluation. However, the Datatracker, ICANN
ICANN (peforming the IANA function), and RFC Editor operate on (performing the IANA function), and RFC Editor operate on separate
separate systems with varying degrees of visibility into the systems with varying degrees of visibility into the processing that
processing that takes place once the stream managers have approved a takes place once the stream managers have approved a document for
document for publication. This document defines the requirements for publication as an RFC. This document defines the requirements for
extending the Datatracker to include increased IANA and RFC Editor extending the Datatracker to include increased IANA and RFC Editor
state information, so that the Datatracker covers the lifetime of an state information, so that the Datatracker covers the lifetime of an
I-D from version -00 to RFC publication. I-D from version -00 to RFC publication.
Additionally, this document lists the processes between the IANA, RFC Additionally, this document lists the processes between the IANA, RFC
Editor, and Secretariat (via the Datatracker) that should be Editor, and Secretariat (via the Datatracker) that should be
automated for accuracy and timely processing. While this document automated for accuracy and timely processing. While this document
includes some details of the IANA, RFC Editor, and Secretariat includes some details of the IANA, RFC Editor, and Secretariat
process, this document does not define any of the processes. The process, this document does not define any of the processes. The
processes are continually reviewed for process optimization and need processes are continually reviewed for process optimization and need
to remain flexible to adapt to new changes in policy and environment. to remain flexible to adapt to new changes in policy and environment.
Processes are defined and set by each of the entities respectively. Processes are defined and set by each of the entities respectively.
2. Integration of Data between the IANA and Datatracker 2. Integration of Data between the IANA and Datatracker
2.1. IANA Information To Be Added to the Datatracker 2.1. IANA Information To Be Added to the Datatracker
Currently, IANA reviews and touches documents at 4 different stages Currently, IANA reviews and touches documents at 4 different stages
in the process from I-D to RFC: Last Call, IESG Review, Document in the process from I-D to RFC for IETF stream documents: Last Call,
Approval (for publication), and RFC Publication. Most of these state IESG Review, Document Approval (for publication), and RFC
changes and issues are not captured in the Datatracker. This section Publication. Most of these state changes and issues are not captured
specifies the requirements for including additional IANA information in the Datatracker. For IRTF and INDEPENDENT, the IANA review
in the Datatracker. process begins when IESG Review is requested. For IAB documents,
review would begin upon request for publication as an RFC. This
section specifies the requirements for including additional IANA
information in the Datatracker.
- Last Call Comments - Last Call Comments
Currently, IANA reviews I-Ds that have been sent to IETF Last Currently, IANA reviews I-Ds that have been sent to IETF Last
Call, inputs comments in their data system, and then emails their Call, inputs comments in their data system, and then emails their
comments to authors, WG chairs, and then to the IESG. These comments to authors, WG chairs, and then to the IESG. These
comments are also manually entered into the Datatracker for the comments are also manually entered into the Datatracker for the
public record. However, it is difficult to determine whether the public record. However, it is difficult to determine whether the
IANA issues have been resolved. To help facilitate tracking of IANA issues have been resolved. To help facilitate tracking of
IANA issues, 5 new substates will be added to the Datatracker: IANA issues, 5 new substates will be added to the Datatracker:
1) IANA Review Needed 1) IANA Review Needed
This flag will allow the community, Secretariat, and IANA to This substate will allow the community, Secretariat, and IANA
easily track which documents have or have not been reviewed by to easily track which documents have or have not been reviewed
IANA. If this state is NOT set to 1) IANA Not OK or 2) IANA by IANA. If this substate is NOT set to 1) IANA Not OK or 2)
OK, the state should be set to "IANA review needed" by default. IANA OK, the substate should be set to "IANA review needed" by
default. For documents that originate from a non-IETF stream,
the default will be used.
2) IANA OK -- Actions Needed 2) IANA OK -- Actions Needed
This substate covers documents that require IANA actions and This substate covers documents that require IANA actions and
the IANA considerations section indicates the details of the the IANA considerations section indicates the details of the
actions correctly. actions correctly.
3) IANA OK -- No Actions Needed 3) IANA OK -- No Actions Needed
This substate covers document that require no IANA actions and This substate covers documents that require no IANA actions and
the IANA considerations section indicates this correctly. the IANA considerations section indicates this correctly.
NOTE: The substate will be set to "IANA OK -- Action Needed" or NOTE: The substate will be set to "IANA OK -- Action Needed" or
"IANA OK -- No Actions Needed" (from "IANA Not OK") once any "IANA OK -- No Actions Needed" (from "IANA Not OK") once any
outstanding issues have been resolved. The comments section will outstanding issues have been resolved. The comments section will
be used to provide details in the History log about whether there be used to provide details in the History log about whether there
are no IANA actions, the text is OK, or the issues have been are no IANA actions, the text is OK, or the issues have been
resolved. resolved.
4) IANA Not OK 4) IANA Not OK
skipping to change at page 4, line 26 skipping to change at page 4, line 37
OK" and the comment field should be populated with a OK" and the comment field should be populated with a
description of the issues and questions. In addition to any description of the issues and questions. In addition to any
questions IANA may have, IANA will also include in the comments questions IANA may have, IANA will also include in the comments
field whether expert review is required, if the doc is field whether expert review is required, if the doc is
dependent on another doc (e.g., doc B registers values in a dependent on another doc (e.g., doc B registers values in a
registry created by doc A, which hasn't been published yet), registry created by doc A, which hasn't been published yet),
and if there is a registry expert appointment required. and if there is a registry expert appointment required.
5) Version Changed -- Review Needed 5) Version Changed -- Review Needed
This flag will allow the community, Secretariat, and IANA to This substate will allow the community, Secretariat, and IANA
easily track which documents have been reviewed and to easily track which documents have been reviewed and
subsequently when a version of an Internet-Draft has changed, subsequently when a version of an Internet-Draft has changed,
therefore requiring a second review of the document by IANA to therefore requiring a second review of the document by IANA to
ensure that either the IANA Considerations have not changed or ensure that either the IANA Considerations have not changed or
that any changes made to the document affecting IANA actions that any changes made to the document affecting IANA actions
are clear. This flag applies to I-Ds that have previously been are clear. This substate applies to I-Ds that have previously
marked as "IANA OK -- Action Needed" or "IANA Not OK". been marked as "IANA OK -- Action Needed" or "IANA Not OK".
Information providing the status of the IANA review (one of the 4 Information providing the status of the IANA review (one of the 4
substates listed above) should be included as part of the evaluation substates listed above) should be included as part of the evaluation
message (sent to the IESG) so that IANA can determine if and what message (sent to the IESG) so that IANA can determine if and what
further action is required. further action is required.
All comments will be recorded in the History log. However, to reduce All comments will be recorded in the History log. However, to reduce
redundancy and manual effort, the Datatracker should provide the redundancy and manual effort, the Datatracker should provide the
ability to receive state information and related comments from the ability to receive state information and related comments from the
IANA tracking system. There should be a notification that comments IANA tracking system. There should be a notification that comments
have been entered in the IANA-maintained system, and entry of those have been entered in the IANA-maintained system, and entry of those
comments into the datatracker and distribution of those comments to comments into the datatracker and distribution of those comments to
the authors should be automated. the authors should be automated.
- IESG Review - IESG Review
As not all documents receive a Last Call, this substate is As not all documents receive a Last Call, this substate is
sometimes the first time that IANA reviews a document. For a sometimes the first time that IANA reviews a document. For a
document that wasn't Last Called, IANA reviews the document, document that wasn't Last Called, IANA reviews the document,
enters comments in their own tracking system, distributes email to enters comments in their own tracking system, distributes email to
authors, WG chairs, and ADs (all interested parties), and then authors and other interested parties (e.g., WG chairs, ISE), and
enters those same comments into the Datatracker, where they are then enters those same comments into the Datatracker, where they
recorded in the History log. In cases where a document was Last are recorded in the History log. In cases where a document was
Called, IANA checks for and reviews version changes and re-reviews Last Called, IANA checks for and reviews version changes and re-
documents to ensure that any flagged IANA issues have been reviews documents to ensure that any identified IANA issues have
resolved. been resolved.
Comments will continue to be recorded in the History log. Comments will continue to be recorded in the History log.
However, to reduce redundancy and manual effort, the Datatracker However, to reduce redundancy and manual effort, the Datatracker
should provide the ability for IANA to enter state information and should provide the ability for IANA to enter substate information
related comments into the IANA tracking system, and distribution and related comments into the IANA tracking system, and
of those comments to the authors and entry into the Datatracker distribution of those comments to the authors and entry into the
should be automated. Datatracker should be automated.
Ideally, the authors will have responded to and resolved any IANA Ideally, the authors will have responded to and resolved any IANA
issues prior to the document being slated for an IESG telechat. issues prior to the document being slated for an IESG telechat.
However, if any document continues to have an "IANA Not OK", However, if any document continues to have an "IANA Not OK",
""Version Changed - Review Needed", or "IANA Review needed" flag "Version Changed - Review Needed", or "IANA Review needed"
and is slated for the IESG telechat, it should be called out in substates and is slated for the IESG telechat, it should be called
the Agenda Package. For example, it could appear as follows: out in the Agenda Package. For example, it could appear as
follows:
o draft-example-00 o draft-example-00
Title of Internet-Draft Title of Internet-Draft
Note: John Doe (jdoe@example.com) is the document shepherd. Note: John Doe (jdoe@example.com) is the document shepherd.
Token: Jane Doe Token: Jane Doe
IANA: IANA Not OK IANA: IANA Not OK
This will ensure that IANA and the ADs are aware that there are This will ensure that IANA and the ADs are aware that there are
still IANA considerations issues to be addressed prior to still IANA considerations issues to be addressed prior to
publication, or that initial or follow-up IANA Review is required publication, or that initial or follow-up IANA Review is required
and not yet completed (in cases where the state is listed as "IANA and not yet completed (in cases where the substate is listed as
review needed" or "Version Revision - Review Needed"). "IANA review needed" or "Version Revision - Review Needed").
- Document Approved for Publication - Document Approved for Publication
Once a document has been approved for publication, the document Once a document has been approved for publication, the document
enters the IANA queue and is tracked using IANA-defined states. enters the IANA queue and is tracked using IANA-defined states.
This state information is not currently available via the This state information is not currently available via the
Datatracker. In order for the community to view the IANA Datatracker. In order for the community to view the IANA
processing states without being redirected to the IANA queue, the processing states without being redirected to the IANA queue, the
Datatracker should be extended to include IANA state information Datatracker should be extended to include IANA state information
as defined by IANA. For example, IANA state information could as defined by IANA. For example, IANA state information could
skipping to change at page 6, line 44 skipping to change at page 7, line 8
References to I-Ds are updated to refer to the RFC once published, References to I-Ds are updated to refer to the RFC once published,
and minor updates may be made to match the published RFC. This and minor updates may be made to match the published RFC. This
data will be tracked in the Datatracker to show when the data will be tracked in the Datatracker to show when the
references in the IANA registries were updated to include the references in the IANA registries were updated to include the
newly assigned RFC Number. newly assigned RFC Number.
2.2. Future IANA Information To Be Available Via the Datatracker 2.2. Future IANA Information To Be Available Via the Datatracker
The document "Definition of IETF Working Group Document States" The document "Definition of IETF Working Group Document States"
[WGDOCUMENT-STATES] includes the following: [RFC6174] includes the following:
4.3.1. Awaiting Expert Review/Resolution of Issues Raised 4.3.1. Awaiting Expert Review/Resolution of Issues Raised
This tag means that someone (e.g. an author or editor of the WG This tag means that someone (e.g. an author or editor of the WG
draft, or a WG Chair) has initiated an expert review of the draft, or a WG Chair) has initiated an expert review of the
document and the review has not yet been completed and/or the document and the review has not yet been completed and/or the
resolution of issues raised by the review has not yet been resolution of issues raised by the review has not yet been
completed. Examples of expert reviews include cross-area completed. Examples of expert reviews include cross-area
reviews, MIB Doctor reviews, security expert reviews, and IANA reviews, MIB Doctor reviews, security expert reviews, and IANA
reviews. reviews.
skipping to change at page 10, line 25 skipping to change at page 10, line 38
or alternate stream name) or alternate stream name)
Note: The RFC Editor database may require updates before Research Note: The RFC Editor database may require updates before Research
Group data can be received from the Datatracker. Group data can be received from the Datatracker.
- IESG Contact - IESG Contact
- Document Shepherd <email> - Document Shepherd <email>
Note: this is the individual currently listed in the "Personnel" section of Note: this is the individual currently listed in the "Personnel" section of
a Document/Protocol action. a Document/Protocol action.
- IANA actions required - IANA actions required
Most of these items are already stored in the Datatracker. However, Most of these items are already stored in the Datatracker. However,
the following fields/flags need to be added: the following fields need to be added:
- Expedited goal date - Expedited goal date
- Consensus (yes/no) - Consensus (yes/no)
- Document Shepherd <email> - Document Shepherd <email>
- IANA actions required - IANA actions required
"Consensus" is as used in [RFC5741]; it determines the appropriate "Consensus" is as used in [RFC5741]; it determines the appropriate
Status of This Memo text to be applied to IETF and IRTF documents. Status of This Memo text to be applied to IETF and IRTF documents.
The Consensus field should be set by the responsible individuals and The Consensus field should be set by the responsible individuals and
it should be listed in the Agenda Package provided before an IESG it should be listed in the Agenda Package provided before an IESG
skipping to change at page 11, line 17 skipping to change at page 11, line 27
The Datatracker should notify the RFC Editor and the Sponsoring AD The Datatracker should notify the RFC Editor and the Sponsoring AD
when a version of an I-D has been made available after the document when a version of an I-D has been made available after the document
has been approved for publication. has been approved for publication.
4.2.2. Datatracker Extensions for Alternate Streams 4.2.2. Datatracker Extensions for Alternate Streams
Once the Datatracker has been updated for the alternate streams Once the Datatracker has been updated for the alternate streams
[ALT-STREAMS], the Datatracker should be updated so that the [ALT-STREAMS], the Datatracker should be updated so that the
following are automated: following are automated:
- the Datatracker should not expire any I-Ds that are under ISE - the Datatracker should not expire any I-Ds that are under review
review. for publication.
- the Datatracker should automatically notify the ISE when an I-D - the Datatracker should automatically notify the approving body
that is under ISE review has been updated (i.e., a new version has when an I-D that is under review has been updated (i.e., a new
been made available). version has been made available).
- the Datatracker should be updated to list I-Ds according to the - the Datatracker should be updated to list I-Ds according to the
stream that requested publication in the Agenda Package. This stream that requested publication in the Agenda Package. This
should help provide additional clarity during IESG reviews, as should help provide additional clarity during IESG reviews, as
there will be a clear indication of from which stream a document there will be a clear indication of from which stream a document
originates. originates.
4.2.2.1. Publication Requests 4.2.2.1. Publication Requests
"Data Tracker States and Annotations for the IAB, IRTF, and "Data Tracker States and Annotations for the IAB, IRTF, and
Independent Submission Streams" [ALT-STREAMS] lists the requirements Independent Submission Streams" [ALT-STREAMS] lists the requirements
for extending the Datatracker to account for alternate stream states for extending the Datatracker to account for alternate stream states
and annotations. In particular, the document introduces the "Sent to and annotations. In particular, the document introduces the "Sent to
the RFC Editor" state, which means the document is complete and has the RFC Editor" state, which means the document is complete and has
been sent to the RFC Editor for publication. been sent to the RFC Editor for publication.
The Datatracker will provide a means for the alternate streams to The Datatracker will provide a means for the alternate streams to
generate a uniform publication request. The stream managers should generate a uniform publication request. Using the Datatracker, the
be able to create an email message that contains the relevant stream managers should be able to generate a publication request that
information for any approved I-D, and the Datatracker will provide contains the relevant information for any approved I-D.
the data (same data provided for any IETF publication request -- see
Section 4.2) in a machine-readable format. This data will be Additionally, the Datatracker will provide the data (the same data
available to the IANA and RFC Editor, so that data entry into the provided for any IETF publication request -- see Section 4.2) in a
IANA and RFC Editor systems can be automated. machine-readable format. This data will be available to the IANA and
RFC Editor, so that data entry into the IANA and RFC Editor systems
can be automated.
This update will allow the IANA and RFC Editor to handle documents in This update will allow the IANA and RFC Editor to handle documents in
a similar manner, regardless of the document's stream. a similar manner, regardless of the document's stream.
4.3. Reporting Requirements 4.3. Reporting Requirements
The Datatracker should have a "Show Discrepancies" feature. It The Datatracker should have a "Show Discrepancies" feature. It
should show all records in the Datatracker that fit certain criteria should show all records in the Datatracker that fit certain criteria
(that seem to be a discrepancy). In addition to showing data on (that seem to be a discrepancy). In addition to showing data on
screen, it should send an email to defined interested parties at screen, it should send an email to defined interested parties at
regular intervals (e.g., weekly). This feature will only be regular intervals (e.g., weekly). This feature will only be
available to a subset of individuals (namely, IANA, RFC Editor, and available to a subset of individuals (namely, IANA, RFC Editor, and
the Secretariat), to ensure that our queues are in sync. This will the Secretariat), to ensure that our queues are in sync. This will
be especially helpful as the Datatracker is extended (now and in the be especially helpful as the Datatracker is extended (now and in the
future), to ensure that all parties are receviing the correct future), to ensure that all parties are receiving the correct
messages/data. messages/data.
An initial set of discrepancies should be defined, and additional An initial set of discrepancies should be defined, and additional
discrepancies could be defined over time. For example, the initial discrepancies could be defined over time. For example, the initial
set of discrepancies could include: set of discrepancies could include:
- Show drafts that have passed through the state "Approved - Show drafts that have passed through the state "Approved
Announcement sent" but do not have an RFC Editor state. Announcement sent" but do not have an RFC Editor state.
- Show drafts that have IANA state "In Progress" but RFC Editor - Show drafts that have IANA state "In Progress" but RFC Editor
skipping to change at page 14, line 20 skipping to change at page 14, line 20
Currently, there are also a couple of state annotations used in RFC Currently, there are also a couple of state annotations used in RFC
Editor state-change emails. These do not alter the Datatracker in Editor state-change emails. These do not alter the Datatracker in
any way, but are listed here for completeness: any way, but are listed here for completeness:
*A = indicates that IANA actions are required *A = indicates that IANA actions are required
*R = indicates potential REFerence holds *R = indicates potential REFerence holds
Normative References Normative References
[IDTRACKER] "The IETF Datatracker tool", Web Application: [ALT-STREAMS] Hoffman, P., "Data Tracker States and Annotations for
https://datatracker.ietf.org/, September 15, the IAB, IRTF, and Independent Submission Streams",
2010. draft-hoffman-alt-streams-tracker, September 2010.
[WGDOCUMENT-STATES] Juskevicius, E., "Definition of IETF Working [IDTRACKER] "The IETF Datatracker tool", Web Application:
Group Document States", draft-ietf-proto- https://datatracker.ietf.org/, September 15, 2010.
wgdocument-states, October 2010.
[ALT-STREAMS] Hoffman, P., "Data Tracker States and Annotations [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process --
for the IAB, IRTF, and Independent Submission Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
Streams", draft-hoffman-alt-streams-tracker,
September 2010.
[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing
Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996. an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC
5226, May 2008.
[RFC 5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for [RFC5741] Daigle, L., Ed., Kolkman, O., Ed., and IAB, "RFC
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", Streams, Headers, and Boilerplates", RFC 5741, December
BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 2008. 2009.
[RFC5741] Daigle, L., Ed., Kolkman, O., Ed., and IAB, "RFC [RFC6174] Juskevicius, E., "Definition of IETF Working Group
Streams, Headers, and Boilerplates", RFC 5741, Document States", RFC 6174, March 2011.
December 2009.
Acknowledgments Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the following indivduals for their The authors would like to thank the following individuals for their
input: input:
Amanda Baber Amanda Baber
Glen Barney Glen Barney
Alice Hagens Alice Hagens
Paul Hoffman Paul Hoffman
Russ Housley Russ Housley
Ed Juskevicius Ed Juskevicius
Henrik Levkowetz Henrik Levkowetz
Cindy Morgan Cindy Morgan
 End of changes. 26 change blocks. 
73 lines changed or deleted 78 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/