draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-iana-rfced-extns-01.txt   draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-iana-rfced-extns-02.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: October 14, 2011 ICANN Expires: December 15, 2011 ICANN
A. Morris A. Morris
AMS AMS
April 14, 2011 June 15, 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-01.txt> <draft-ietf-genarea-datatracker-iana-rfced-extns-02.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 37 skipping to change at page 2, line 37
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English. than English.
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]. In this document, the term "IETF Datatracker"
is used as a generic name for the existing tool used to track state
changes as Internet-Drafts are processed. The word "IETF" in the
name "IETF Datatracker" is not meant to limit use of the tool to the
IETF document stream; this document expands use of the tool to the
other streams described in [RFC4844].
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 [RFC6174] and [ALT-STREAMS], to include tracking information about in [RFC6174] and [ALT-STREAMS], to include tracking information about
a document during its progression from version -00 to it being a document during its progression from version -00 to it being
requested for IESG evaluation. However, the Datatracker, ICANN requested for IESG evaluation. However, the Datatracker, ICANN
(performing the IANA function), and RFC Editor operate on separate (performing the IANA function), and RFC Editor operate on separate
systems with varying degrees of visibility into the processing that systems with varying degrees of visibility into the processing that
takes place once the stream managers have approved a document for takes place once the stream managers have approved a document for
skipping to change at page 3, line 14 skipping to change at page 3, line 18
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.
NOTE: The IANA and RFC Editor are independent functions and they
retain ownership of their data, state names, and tracking systems
once a document enters their queues. This document discusses how the
data from the IANA and RFC Editor queues can be better reflected in
the Datatracker for ease of the community. If there is any
discrepancy, the IANA and RFC Editor data are definitive (post
approval for publication). Prior to a document being approved for
publication, the Datatracker is definitive for tracking IANA status
information.
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 for IETF stream documents: Last Call, in the process from I-D to RFC for IETF stream documents: IETF Last
IESG Review, Document Approval (for publication), and RFC Call, IESG Review, Document Approval (for publication), and RFC
Publication. Most of these state changes and issues are not captured Publication. Most of these state changes and issues are not captured
in the Datatracker. For IRTF and INDEPENDENT, the IANA review in the Datatracker. For the IRTF and INDEPENDENT streams, the IANA
process begins when IESG Review is requested. For IAB documents, review process begins when IESG Review is requested. For the IAB
review would begin upon request for publication as an RFC. This stream, review would begin upon request for publication as an RFC.
section specifies the requirements for including additional IANA This section specifies the requirements for including additional IANA
information in the Datatracker. information in the Datatracker.
- Last Call Comments - IETF 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 substate will allow the community, Secretariat, and IANA This substate will allow the community, Secretariat, and IANA
to easily track which documents have or have not been reviewed to easily track which documents have or have not been reviewed
by IANA. If this substate is NOT set to 1) IANA Not OK or 2) by IANA. If this substate is NOT set to IANA Not OK or IANA
IANA OK, the substate should be set to "IANA review needed" by OK, the substate should be set to "IANA review needed" by
default. For documents that originate from a non-IETF stream, default (this is the first substate for tracking IANA data).
the default will be used. 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 documents that require no IANA actions and This substate covers documents that require no IANA actions and
skipping to change at page 4, line 38 skipping to change at page 4, line 48
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 substate will allow the community, Secretariat, and IANA This substate will allow the community, Secretariat, and IANA
to 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 in Last Call
therefore requiring a second review of the document by IANA to has changed, therefore requiring a second review of the
ensure that either the IANA Considerations have not changed or document by IANA to ensure that either the IANA Considerations
that any changes made to the document affecting IANA actions have not changed or that any changes made to the document
are clear. This substate applies to I-Ds that have previously affecting IANA actions are clear. This substate applies to I-
been marked as "IANA OK -- Action Needed" or "IANA Not OK". Ds that are in any substate except "IANA Review Needed" and
"Version Changed".
Information providing the status of the IANA review (one of the 4 When new versions are available, the Datatracker will
automatically set the IANA substate to "Version Changed --
Review Needed".
Information providing the status of the IANA review (one of the 5
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 Evaluation
As not all documents receive a Last Call, this substate is As not all documents receive an IETF Last Call, this state 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 IETF 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 and other interested parties (e.g., WG chairs, ISE), and authors and other interested parties (e.g., WG chairs, ISE), and
then enters those same comments into the Datatracker, where they then enters those same comments into the Datatracker, where they
are recorded in the History log. In cases where a document was are recorded in the History log. In cases where a document was
Last Called, IANA checks for and reviews version changes and re- IETF Last Called, IANA checks for and reviews version changes and
reviews documents to ensure that any identified IANA issues have re-reviews documents to ensure that any identified IANA issues
been resolved. have 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 substate information should provide the ability for IANA to enter substate information
and related comments into the IANA tracking system, and and related comments into the IANA tracking system, and
distribution of those comments to the authors and entry into the distribution of those comments to the authors and entry into the
Datatracker 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.
skipping to change at page 9, line 38 skipping to change at page 9, line 48
The RFC Editor will notify the Datatracker when a new RFC has been The RFC Editor will notify the Datatracker when a new RFC has been
published, and the Datatracker should have the ability to published, and the Datatracker should have the ability to
automatically update the relevant fields with data related to the automatically update the relevant fields with data related to the
published RFC. In particular, the RFC number will be recorded in published RFC. In particular, the RFC number will be recorded in
the Datatracker. However, note that all fields are subject to the Datatracker. However, note that all fields are subject to
change during editing and should be updated; for example, document change during editing and should be updated; for example, document
title and the list of authors are sometimes changed, and character title and the list of authors are sometimes changed, and character
counts and page counts are always changed. counts and page counts are always changed.
4) notation when documents are withdrawn from the RFC Editor queue
If a document is to be removed from the RFC Editor / IANA queues,
the responsible party (e.g., AD or Secretariat) should change the
state of the Document in the Datatracker to something other than
"RFC Ed Queue". The Datatracker should provide a text box to
allow the responsible party to record details about the state
change. The state change and the related details will be recorded
in the History tab. The state change in the Datatracker will
trigger an email message to the RFC Editor and IANA as
notification that the state of the doc has been set to "state"
(the newly assigned state) with the details provided in the text
box. The RFC Editor and IANA will update their queues
accordingly, and the document will disappear from their respective
queues.
4. Other Updates to the Datatracker 4. Other Updates to the Datatracker
While the primary goal of this document is to update the Datatracker While the primary goal of this document is to update the Datatracker
to display the IANA and RFC Editor process state information, the to display the IANA and RFC Editor process state information, the
Datatracker could hold additional data for use by IANA and the RFC Datatracker could hold additional data for use by IANA and the RFC
Editor that would allow for increased automation, thus reducing the Editor that would allow for increased automation, thus reducing the
potential for delays and processing errors. This section defines potential for delays and processing errors. This section defines
requirements for updates to the Datatracker to eliminate some of the requirements for updates to the Datatracker to eliminate some of the
administrative tasks currently performed by staff. administrative tasks currently performed by staff.
skipping to change at page 11, line 6 skipping to change at page 11, line 28
"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
telechat so that the Area Directors can quickly review the status of telechat so that the Area Directors can quickly review the status of
the documents under review and correct the field if Consensus was not the documents under review and correct the field if Consensus was not
received. received.
Additionally, the Agenda Package provided before an IESG telechat Additionally, the Agenda Package provided before an IESG telechat
should show the expiration date of the Last Call. This will be should show the expiration date of the IETF Last Call. This will be
helpful for the ADs and the Secretariat to track the Last Call helpful for the ADs and the Secretariat to track the IETF Last Call
timeline. timeline.
When a document has been added to the RFC Editor queue (i.e., shows When a document has been added to the RFC Editor queue (i.e., shows
an RFC Editor state in the Datatracker), an automated note should be an RFC Editor state in the Datatracker), an automated note should be
sent to the Secretariat as acknowledgment that the announcement has sent to the Secretariat as acknowledgment that the announcement has
been received. been received.
4.2.1. Notifications 4.2.1. Notifications
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.
Additionally, the Datatracker should notify the RFC Editor and IANA
when the state of an I-D has been moved to something than "RFC Ed
Queue" or "RFC Published" -- that is, when it should be removed from
the RFC Editor and IANA processing queues. See item 4) in Section
3.1 for more detail.
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 review - the Datatracker should not expire any I-Ds that are under review
for publication. for publication.
- the Datatracker should automatically notify the approving body - the Datatracker should automatically notify the approving body
skipping to change at page 12, line 42 skipping to change at page 13, line 25
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
State is not equal to "IANA" or does not contain "*A" (see State is not equal to "IANA" or does not contain "*A" (see
Appendix B). Appendix B).
- Show drafts that have IANA state "Waiting on RFC Editor" or "RFC- - Show drafts that have IANA state "Waiting on RFC Editor" or "RFC-
Ed-Ack", but RFC Editor State is "IANA" or contains "*A" (See Ed-Ack", but RFC Editor State is "IANA" or contains "*A" (See
Appendix B). Appendix B).
- Show drafts that have a state of something other than "RFC Ed
Queue" or "RFC Published" that are listed in the RFC Editor or
IANA queues.
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
This document does not request any IANA registrations. This document does not request any IANA registrations.
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
This document does not propose any new Internet mechanisms, and has This document does not propose any new Internet mechanisms, and has
no security implications for the Internet. no security implications for the Internet.
Appendix A. Current IANA States and Definitions Appendix A. Current IANA States and Definitions
skipping to change at page 14, line 30 skipping to change at page 15, line 30
[ALT-STREAMS] Hoffman, P., "Data Tracker States and Annotations for [ALT-STREAMS] Hoffman, P., "Data Tracker States and Annotations for
the IAB, IRTF, and Independent Submission Streams", the IAB, IRTF, and Independent Submission Streams",
draft-hoffman-alt-streams-tracker, September 2010. draft-hoffman-alt-streams-tracker, September 2010.
[IDTRACKER] "The IETF Datatracker tool", Web Application: [IDTRACKER] "The IETF Datatracker tool", Web Application:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/, September 15, 2010. https://datatracker.ietf.org/, September 15, 2010.
[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process --
Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996. Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
[RFC4844] Daigle, L., Ed., and Internet Architecture Board, "The
RFC Series and RFC Editor", RFC 4844, July 2007.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing
an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC
5226, May 2008. 5226, May 2008.
[RFC5741] Daigle, L., Ed., Kolkman, O., Ed., and IAB, "RFC [RFC5741] Daigle, L., Ed., Kolkman, O., Ed., and IAB, "RFC
Streams, Headers, and Boilerplates", RFC 5741, December Streams, Headers, and Boilerplates", RFC 5741, December
2009. 2009.
[RFC6174] Juskevicius, E., "Definition of IETF Working Group [RFC6174] Juskevicius, E., "Definition of IETF Working Group
Document States", RFC 6174, March 2011. Document States", RFC 6174, March 2011.
Acknowledgments Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the following individuals for their The authors would like to thank the following individuals for their
input: input:
Amanda Baber Amanda Baber
Glen Barney Glen Barney
Adrian Farrel
Alice Hagens Alice Hagens
Paul Hoffman Paul Hoffman
Russ Housley Russ Housley
Ed Juskevicius Ed Juskevicius
Henrik Levkowetz Henrik Levkowetz
Cindy Morgan Cindy Morgan
Ray Pelletier Ray Pelletier
Rober Sparks
Peter St. Andre
Amy Vezza Amy Vezza
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Sandy Ginoza Sandy Ginoza
Association Management Solutions Association Management Solutions
48377 Fremont Blvd., Suite 117 48377 Fremont Blvd., Suite 117
Fremont, CA 94538 Fremont, CA 94538
United States United States
 End of changes. 22 change blocks. 
31 lines changed or deleted 84 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/