Folks -
I've recently been asked to review a number of works in progress related to restructuring and other similar things. Those documents were liberally splattered with references to various IDs (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-newtrk-cruft-00.txt, http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-newtrk-repurposing-isd-00.txt, http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wasserman-iasa-bcp-01.txt etc). Its unclear that either the work in progress or the cited drafts will ever be published as RFCs. Its also unclear that this (restructuring etc) will be resolved within the 6 month lifetime of any given ID. Its also unclear that we can afford to either have these expire, or continually resubmit them. And finally, we NEED to have this set of documents as permanent archivable documents to maintain the historical record.
It seems to me that neither ID status nor RFC status are appropriate for these documents. The ID series is, by design, ephemeral and generally not citeable. The RFC series is stable and citeable, but the lead time for introducing an RFC is somewhat north of 30 days or more.
I hate to open Pandora's box, but what I think we need is a citable, stable document series that has a production lead time similar to that of the IDs. I would probably limit this to the non-technical administrivia we've been recently inundated with.
*sigh*
Mike
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf