The charter of the New IETF Standards Track (newtrk) working group in the General Area of the IETF has been updated. For additional information, please contact the Area Directors or the working group Chairs. New IETF Standards Track (newtrk) --------------------------------- Current Status: Active Working Group Chair(s): Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu> General Area Advisor: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Mailing Lists: General Discussion: newtrk@lists.uoregon.edu To Subscribe: newtrk-request@lists.uoregon.edu Archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html Description of Working Group: The problem working group found that many IETF participants feel that the current IETF hierarchy of Proposed, Draft and Full Standard maturity levels for specifications is no longer being used in the way that was envisioned when the stratification was originally proposed. In practice, the IETF currently has a one-step standards process. The goal of this working group is to agree on a revised IETF Standards Track, to replace the standards track described in RFC 2026. The working group will also decide on a process path forward. The disparity between the documented IETF standards process and what is used in practice can cause confusion on the part of those people or organizations that use IETF technologies. It has also led to a general disregard of the cautions in RFC 2026 on the appropriate deployment of IETF technologies described in Internet Drafts or Proposed Standard RFCs. The NewTrk working group is a follow on to the newtrk BOF held during the 58th IETF Meeting in Minneapolis. That BOF was held as a result of the work of the problem working group. The sense of the room at the end of the newtrk BOF was that: 1/ some change was needed to the IETF Standards Track 2/ a revised standards track should have more than one stage 3/ there should be some form of "working group snapshot," this might or might not be a formal stage on the standards track and might or might not be an archival publication 4/ at least one stage should require multiple interoperable implementations of the technology to ensure document clarity 5/ any revised standards track should include some type of "IPR hook" to keep the IETF and IESG out of the business of determining what IPR claims are legitimate and what licensing terms are fair. The goal of this working group is to agree on a revised IETF Standards Track, taking into consideration the above points, to replace the standards track described in RFC 2026. The working group will also decide on a process for making forward progress. Some of the possible paths being producing a revised version of RFC 2026 (and maybe other RFCs), producing a standalone document or documents that update parts of the existing RFCs or a mixture of the two. There may be other possibilities. The working group should also take into account other issues raised by the problem working group and during the newtrk BOF as needed. The deliberations of the working group will cover at least the following topics: a/ the standards track itself (number of stages, movement between maturity levels, working group snapshots, maintenance, IPR issues) b/ access to the standards track for individual submissions c/ non-standards track document categories including BCP, Informational, Experimental, and Historic and their relationship to the standards track d/ usability of the standards track (bug fixes, version numbers, grouping multiple specifications, and maybe deprecation) e/ development of a primary marker to distinguish documents originating from the IETF from those not originating from the IETF Discussions in the working group since the NewTrk BOF have added two possible additional topics to the working group's agenda. As part of a revised standards track process, the group will also explore the creation of a new series of short IESG-approved IETF documents to describe and define IETF technology standards. These documents should be able to be used to define the IETF understanding of what constituted a specific IETF standard at particular points in time. The working group will also consider the usefulness of implementation and or interoperability registers in conjunction with such a document series. The working group will also discuss the usefulness of new "cleanup" procedures to reclassify existing standards track RFCs based on breadth of adoption (or lack of it) or the risk to the Internet of the technology described in the RFC. The NewTrk working group will coordinate its work with other reform activities currently underway in the IETF. Goals and Milestones: Sep 04 publish ID describing new document series to describe and define individual IETF technology standards. Sep 04 publish ID describing a new RFC cleanup process Oct 04 determine if there is consensus to proceed with defining a new RFC cleanup process Dec 04 if the consensus was to create a new RFC cleanup process then submit an ID describing the process to IESG for publication as a BCP RFC Dec 04 determine if there is consensus to proceed with a new document series to describe and define individual IETF technology standards. Dec 04 Publish initial Internet-Draft(s) describing a revised IETF standards track Apr 05 if the consensus was to create a new document series to describe and define individual IETF technology standards, submit ID describing the series to IESG for publication as a BCP RFC. Apr 05 Submit final Internet-Draft(s) describing a revised IETF standards track to IESG for publication as a BCP _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
