On 3/1/11 12:43 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 2011-03-02 01:29, Andrew Sullivan wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 01:18:12PM +0100, Shane Kerr wrote: >> >>> FWIW, this came up in the dnsext working group a few years ago. In the >>> end, I don't think anything was done, which is kind of a shame. >> >> Nothing was done for want of workers ;-) We concluded there was no >> real room in official IETF channels for such a publication, > > I have asserted for some years that the "Applicability Statement" > subset of the standards track, defined in RFC 2026, could perfectly well > be used for explaining how a group of RFCs fit together. There have > been various proposals for more specific methods than that which haven't > caught on, but the real problem has already been mentioned: in v6ops ops we have documents like: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-jankiewicz-v6ops-v4v6biblio-03.txt opsec http://tools.ietf.org/wg/opsec/draft-ietf-opsec-efforts/ >>>> Nothing was done for want of workers ;-) > > It is a lot of work. I've done it for IETF process RFCs and even that > was a lot of work: > http://www.ietf.org/about/process-docs.html > > Brian > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf