Re: draft-housley-two-maturity-levels-00

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

 



We often replace a Proposed Standard with an updated document that
remains at the Proposed Standard maturity level.  There does not seem to
be confusion when this happens.

Russ

On 6/20/2010 8:01 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>> "In several situations, a Standard is obsoleted by a Proposed Standard"
>>
>> A Standard is not obsoleted by a Proposed Standard. A RFC with a status
>> of Internet Standard can be obsoleted by a RFC at Proposed Standard.
> 
> In some cases, it should be possible to replace an RFC with a reviewed
> version, at the same maturity level.  For example, the attention that
> successive SMTP documents have to pay to source routing decreases over
> time.  There is no reason why a new RFC aimed at reviewing a mature spec
> would need to reduce its maturity level, if it accomplishes the current
> requirements for third level.  I hope this point will be made clearer.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


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