> Date: 2005-05-14 20:22 > From: Will McAfee <hextic@xxxxxxxxx> > I think the minimum time before a document can pass to another > standards-track state is ridiculously long. 4 months (RFC 2026, sect. 6.2) != "ridiculously long" > A two-page > proposed standard can take an absolutely ridiculous amount of time to > pass through! I strongly suspect that there is no such thing. A minimal Standards Track RFC (headings, footers, title, boilerplate, normative reference to BCP 14, minimal security considerations section, author's address, not to mention actually saying something that is suitable for standardization) is likely to be much longer than two pages. Heck, a "hello, world" Informational RFC would be two pages, what with boilerplate, etc. A proper Proposed Standard should include a list of conformance criteria, so that there is a clear specification of what constitutes fully conforming, interoperable implementations (which need to be documented for advancement to Draft). Aside from those minimal considerations, even a trivial Proposed Standard is likely to have several normative or informative references. Add discussion of issues outlined in BCPs 18, 22, 26, 61, 72, 82, RFCs 1958, 3426, 3429, and probably several others depending on subject matter, and there is no way that a Standards Track RFC can be as short as two pages. Indeed, one of the shortest Standards Track RFCs published to date (by page count) which has anything resembling the currently mandated boilerplate is RFC 3912 (4 pages). Note that the second paragraph of section 1 of RFC 3912 acknowledges that a modern specification would have to address several design issues which in fact are not addressed in that short document. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf