Getting Rid of the Cruft: Report from an Experiment in Identifying and Reclassifying Obsolete Standards Documents
draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-03

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 03 and is now closed.

(Allison Mankin; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ( for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info

(Brian Carpenter; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ( for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) (was Discuss) Yes

Yes ()
No email
send info

(Alex Zinin; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Bert Wijnen; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info

(Bill Fenner; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info

(Margaret Cullen; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info

(Mark Townsley; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Sam Hartman; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info

(Scott Hollenbeck; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info

(Ted Hardie; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info

(David Kessens; former steering group member) Abstain

Abstain (2005-12-15 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
I am not clear on how this document fits in the new-trk working group charter.

I also agree with Russ that I am confused about this document:
It is an informational document that describes an experiment ?

I also cannot agree with the conclusions of the experiment:

Basically, declaring success if many documents are reclassified as Historic.

Is this document telling us that the current process actually works and
everything is fine ?

To me this merely is a success from the point of view of a paperpusher.
Yes, we got documents reclassified but did we do any good for the IETF beyond spending a lot of time and resources on this topic ? Does anybody care that we declared documents historic that nobody was using anyways ?

Do we have any clue how we can repeat this so that we won't end up with yet
another large set of cruft in the future ?

This document's status is Informational and I see little harm in publishing it, so I have decided not stand in the way of publication.