Re: BCP97bis

["Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

• Sure, you could make some assumptions that what's in the normative reference is correct, or sane, or trustworthy, or whatever.  What if you're wrong?  What if you want to be certain?

 

I suppose asking the authors isn’t practical for some reasons. I’m mildly curious what those reasons are, but that’s a secondary point.

 

• Shouldn't our processes err on the side of pushing for quality?

 

Sure, as long as reality isn’t constrained.  I looked up X.509, the ITU standard for certificates.  Text on the website says:

                This text was produced through a joint activity with ISO and IEC. According to the agreement with our partners, this document is only available through payment. Please get in touch with sales@xxxxxxx for more information.

 

Are normative references to X509 now not proper? Similarly, the next version of FIPS is a “diff” document around a couple of ISO documents; the cheapest price I found for them is USD $180.  Are normative references to FIPS 140-3 now not proper?

 

We have a working group that supports IEEE point-to-point time protocol.  That standard costs USD $280.  What should the NTP (and predecessor TICTOC) working group do?