Subject: RE: Query about procedure: Tombstones?

From: Eastlake III Donald-LDE008 <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 14:51:47 -0500

If you are going to do that because disk is cheap, why not keep,
or even restore from backups, every version of every draft that
we still have a copy of somewhere?

I have no problem with the time out being longer than 6 months,
like maybe a year, but I think they should go away.

Donald

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of [email-masked]
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 2:13 PM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Query about procedure: Tombstones?

> I'd like to check that there
> aren't any people depending on the current behaviour before I say "this is 
> obvious - just do it".

I do not think its obvious
I think the Tombstones are useful to tell people what happened to an ID 
they might have seen referenced or discussed - disk is cheap - I'd leave them

Scott

---

From: Mark Townsley <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:45:11 +0100

> we still have a copy of somewhere?

No clutter, draft->RFC references easily seen, no tombstones since expired 
drafts never die:

http://www.watersprings.org/pub/id/

Neat and simple. In fact, if the watersprings site or one very much like it 
didn't exist and work so well, I'd be begging for something similar from the 
IETF servers.

- Mark

obvious - just do it".
 > I think the Tombstones are useful to tell people what happened to an ID they 
might have seen referenced or discussed - disk is cheap - I'd leave them

---

From: "W. Mark Townsley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 15:33:12 +0100

drafts never die.

- Mark