On 23 Nov, 2009, at 09:11, Cullen Jennings wrote:
Pretty much all the emails I have received on this have suggested we should just go publish it now. To be clear, I was not talking about forming a WG to go do a standards track version of this. I was talking about clicking one flag in the data tracker and changing it from information to standards track and publishing the draft "as is" as standards track.
I support this, with one modification: I don't think we need to commit to publishing this draft literally "as is".
People like Dave Cridland have pointed out legitimate style criticisms, which I'm happy to fix in the next couple of weeks.
As I'm sure you know (but others may not) a Standards-Track RFC doesn't need a Working Group. It's possible to have an Individual Submission Standards-Track RFC, subject to the IETF community reviewing it and finding it to be worthwhile, and this would not be the first time I've done that. Last year we published RFC 5227, "IPv4 Address Conflict Detection", as an Individual Submission Standards- Track RFC.
I think Multicast DNS easily meets criteria for Proposed Standard. In fact, in terms of stability, maturity, deployment, number of independent implementations, etc., it easily meets criteria that for other protocols would qualify them for Draft Standard status.
When other Standards-Track RFCs and other standards bodies (ECMA, WiFi alliance, ISO/IEC, XMPP, etc.) need to reference Multicast DNS, having a Standards-Track document to reference helps avoid procedural objections.
Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@xxxxxxxxx> * Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Inc. * Internet Architecture Board * www.stuartcheshire.org _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf