The IESG has approved the following document: - 'IETF Operational Notes ' <draft-alvestrand-ipod-03.txt> as an Experimental RFC This document has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an IETF Working Group. This is a process experiment under RFC 3933. The IESG contact person is Brian Carpenter. A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-alvestrand-ipod-03.txt Technical Summary This document describes a new document series (IONs) intended for use as a repository for IETF operations documents, which should be more ephemeral than RFCs, but more referenceable than internet-drafts, and with more clear handling procedures than a random Web page. It proposes to establish this series as an RFC 3933 process experiment. Working Group Summary During IETF Last Call, concern was expressed that ION documents must not be used to change matters of IETF process that require IETF consensus. This experiment doesn't change the IESG's authority, but it creates a systematic way to document procedural decisions. Text was added to clarify that IONs cannot override BCPs. The disposition of ION documents if the experiment is deemed a failure was clarified, as were other points questioned during Last Call. Finally, the IESG needs to affirm its support for the experiment. Protocol Quality Reviewed by Brian Carpenter Note to RFC Editor Please update as follows: OLD Old versions MAY be published in the draft store, but there's no requirement that they remain available indefinitely. Experience will show what the best policy for draft retention is. NEW Old versions may be published in the draft store, and must be kept in a version management system, for the duration of the experiment. Experience will show what the best policy for draft retention is if the series is made permanent. OLD If someone wishes to do such a split while the experiment is running, the BCPs cannot refer to the "procedures" documents as IONs, since the concept of an ION may go away. NEW If someone wishes to do such a split while the experiment is running, the BCPs cannot refer to the "procedures" documents as IONs, since the concept of an ION may go away. In that case, any procedures removed from a BCP must either be reinstated or otherwise stored as a permanently available reference. OLD o Web pages, which can be changed without notice, provide very little ability to track changes, and have no formal standing - confusion is often seen about who has the right to update them, what the process for updating them is, and so on. It is hard when looking at a web page to see whether this is a current procedure, a procedure introduced and abandoned, or a draft of a future procedure. NEW o Web pages, which can be changed without notice, provide very little ability to track changes, and have no formal standing - confusion is often seen about who has the right to update them, what the process for updating them is, and so on. It is hard when looking at a web page to see whether this is a current procedure, a procedure introduced and abandoned, or a draft of a future procedure. For certain procedures, their informal documentation in the "IESG Guide" wiki has partially clarified this situation but has no official status. _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
