nanog mailing list archives
Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested
From: Rob Seastrom <rs () seastrom com>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 09:24:49 -0400
William Norton <wbn () drpeering net> writes:
Agreed - Hence the âCurrentâ in the title. Maybe the date of the document will be the key to let people know that they have the most current version.
The date of a single document is of scant use in determining its currency unless there is some sort of requirement for periodic recertification and gratuitous reissue of BCOPs (for instance, anything with a date stamp more than 18 months in the past is by definition invalid). That seems like busy work to periodically affirm that a good idea is still a good idea, and I don't volunteer for this job. :) I'm on board for wholesale replacement of the document (with revision history preserved) rather than the RFC series approach. The wiki/living document approach others have suggested seems like a poor one to me, for the same reason that I dislike the current trend of "there's no release tarball, major release, point release, or regression testing - just git clone the repository" in free software development. Releng is hard and thankless but adds enormous value and serves as a forcing function for some level of review, cursory though it may be. -r
Current thread:
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested, (continued)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Owen DeLong (Mar 12)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested George, Wes (Mar 13)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Andrew Sullivan (Mar 13)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Owen DeLong (Mar 13)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Rick Casarez (Mar 13)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Mel Beckman (Mar 13)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Lee Howard (Mar 13)
- RE: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Phil Bedard (Mar 13)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Owen DeLong (Mar 13)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested William Norton (Mar 14)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Rob Seastrom (Mar 15)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Charles N Wyble (Mar 15)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Rob Seastrom (Mar 15)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Harlan Stenn (Mar 15)
- Supporting network time software development/maintenance (was: Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested) Rob Seastrom (Mar 16)
- Re: Supporting network time software development/maintenance (was: Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested) Harlan Stenn (Mar 16)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested George, Wes (Mar 13)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Owen DeLong (Mar 12)
- Message not available
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Lee Howard (Mar 15)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Andrew Sullivan (Mar 15)
- Re: BCOP appeals numbering scheme -- feedback requested Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 15)