Re: netwrk stuff

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Jul 12, 2006, at 7:28 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

RFCs are published as Informational, Proposed Standard or Experimental. This represents the confidence level the IETF/IESG has at the moment of publication. Irrespective of I/PS/E, a document may move to Standard (which replaces Draft Standard and Internet Standard) or Historic if its implementation and deployment warrant this. The IESG publishes a short note explaining the rationale when changing designations.

Seems mostly reasonable.

I do believe that there is value in the BCP status, and would add it to the above. PS presumes that we are testing something, like a protocol, while BCP presumes that we are stating something that is believed to be true now but might become untrue and need to be reconsidered in the future, like a policy.

I would also argue in favor of the "Historic" status. Documents are rarely published as historic, although it has happened (RFC 1716). But they should be allowed to become historic at some future date.

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]