On Sep 8, 2010, at Sep 83:12 PMPDT, Richard Bennett wrote: > It seems to me that one of the issues here is that architecture models are published as Informational when they're clearly not in the same level of authority as most Informational RFCs. An architecture document is meant to guide future work on standards track RFCs, and has been regarded historically as more or less binding. > > The easy fix is to create an "Architectural" category within the standards track. There's obviously a big difference between RFC 2475 and IP for Avian Carriers. > But not so obvious between 'IP for Avian Carriers' and RFC4838... :) - K _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf