On 28-Aug-24 10:21, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
On Aug 27, 2024, at 5:04 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 28-Aug-24 08:38, Salz, Rich wrote:
As long as you (the co-authors) accept that the process may mean unwinding the work you have done on (so far) 9 successive versions of this draft.
Sure. I started this work (with Scott and others) not knowing what it would look like after a consensus process was done with it. No matter what happens, I think a single document is easier to read than the dozen-plus that changed things over time.
As for my suggestion to hold off discussion, I'm not the IETF-list moderation team and of course folks are free to ignore me. My reason for making suggestion was that I thought it would be good to have a single list for the discussions, rather than fragmenting.
The URL you pointed to on the IETF website seems to me a symptom of no single formal document. :)
I think it's also a living proof that no single fixed document can be sufficient. Like any legal or regulatory system, there is a constant need for updates and additions. Our system of immutable RFCs isn't well adapted to this.
see
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-newtrk-repurposing-isd-00
Indeed. In fact, https://www.ietf.org/process/informal/ started out as draft-carpenter-procdoc-roadmap, and was partly inspired by draft-bradner-stdproc-isd.
Brian
