Network Working Group P. Hoffman Internet-Draft VPN Consortium Intended status: Informational July 9, 2010 Expires: January 10, 2011 Data Tracker States and Annotations for the IAB, IRTF, and Independent Submission Streams draft-hoffman-alt-streams-tracker-02 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 January 10, 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 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 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 finishing a particular document; IETF participants might want to know the progress of IRTF research documents that are in areas that are similar 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 which are specific to each of the IAB, the IRTF, and the ISE document flows. A 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. 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 whomever administers the tracker. Also, this document assumes that whomever is making the edits to the state and annotations can enter comments that will be publicly visible. 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, but 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 Proposed IAB Document -- This document is by an IAB member who wants the IAB to consider it for the IAB stream. o Accepted IAB Document -- This document has been adopted by the IAB and is being actively developed. 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.) 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 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 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 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 Draft Needed -- Comments that will cause changes have been submitted, and no processing is expected until a new draft is issued. o Document Shepherd Followup-- [[ NOT SURE; ADOPTED FROM EARLIER WORDING]] 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 which 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 Write-up -- IRTF documents have document shepherds who help RG documents through the process after the RG has finished with the document. The document's shepherd write-up is being prepared. 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 Submitted IRTF Document 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. 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 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 Draft 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 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. It is expected that RG chairs will usually only set state and annotation status for IRTF stream documents before they have gone to the IRSG for review ("Candidate RG Document", "Active RG Document", "Parked RG Document", "In RG Last Call", "Waiting for Document Shepherd Write-up" and "Awaiting IRSG Reviews"). However, they should be able to set the state and annotations for a draft at any time before it has been sent to the RFC Editor. Given that RG chairs are sometimes delinquent, the IRTF chair should be able to modify the state and annotations for any IRTF document at any time. 4. Independent Submission Stream This section describes the desired states and annotations for 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 Production Center -- The ISE processing of this document is complete and it has been sent to the RFC Production Center 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. 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 Draft Needed -- Requests for revisions have been sent to the author(s), and no further ISE processing is expected until a new draft is issued. 5. IANA Considerations None. 6. Security Considerations Changing the states in the Data Tracker does not affect the security of the Internet in any significant fashion. 7. 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 and Nevil Brownlee. 8. References 8.1. Normative References [RFC4844] Daigle, L. and Internet Architecture Board, "The RFC Series and RFC Editor", RFC 4844, July 2007. 8.2. 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. Author's Address Paul Hoffman VPN Consortium Email: paul.hoffman@vpnc.org