Murry,
I think I agree that a wiki page for every RFC is too chaotic an idea to be workable.
I agree with the thought that the suggestion under consideration could usefully be amended as "a wiki page for every RFC that needs one".
If I write a specification, it's published as an RFC, and we don't need to say much else, we don't need a wiki page for that.
I'd like to suggest an amendment as "a wiki page for every protocol that needs one".
One of our problems is that we haven't come up with a useful way of grouping specifications that, taken together, describe a protocol, at some specific point in time. STDs should have been that grouping, but the failure for so many standards-track specifications to advance to full Standard made STDs much less relevant in the IETF as we have it today.
When we've done summary documents for protocols that have been massively extended over one or more decades (I'm most familiar with TCP - RFC 4614 - and SIP - RFC 5411), I think those have been very useful, but they tend to be published once - they aren't living descriptions of the protocol as it evolves.
Perhaps we should be thinking about how we maintain our body of corporate knowledge at the protocol level, which is not necessarily the individual RFC level.
Spencer
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf