If we were to do what? Publish IETF Stream (rough consensus)
Informational and Experimental RFCs? We already do that. And have done
so for many years.
If you are trying to argue that we should use a different form of
publication, please make and justify that argument. There is lots of
disinformation and misinformation out there. (I recently observed
another SDO citing an expired individual draft as if it were an approved
RFC.)
Yours,
Joel
On 7/16/2020 11:04 AM, Salz, Rich wrote:
I also note that many other SDOs publish informative,
non-standard, documents in the form of technical reports and
that things we would call Experimental (or our original
definition of Proposed Standard) show up as things "for trial
use". So, again, fwiw, we are not the only, or even the first,
body to conclude that formal review, consensus, and publication
of such documents is a practical necessity.
If we were to do this, we need another term besides RFC. After 20 years, everyone "knows" that RFC means an Internet standard.
(Yes, I exaggerate about what everyone knows)
