+1 On Nov 29, 2011, at 10:51 AM, Bradner, Scott wrote: > to be pedantic - a BCP stands for the best way we know how to do something > it is not required that the process actually be in use before the BCP is adopted > > as Mike O'Dell once said, if BCPs had to reflect what was actually being done we > could never have a BCP defining good manners on the IETF mailing list > > see RFC 2026 - it says > The BCP subseries of the RFC series is designed to be a way to > standardize practices and the results of community deliberations. A > BCP document is subject to the same basic set of procedures as > standards track documents and thus is a vehicle by which the IETF > community can define and ratify the community's best current thinking > on a statement of principle or on what is believed to be the best way > to perform some operations or IETF process function. > > i.e, the IETF's "best current thinking" on the "best way" to do something - not > 'describing the way something is done' > > this has always been the case - e.g., RFC 6410 described a new standards track > not the (not well used) existing standards track > > Scott > > On Nov 29, 2011, at 10:43 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: > >> On Nov 28, 2011, at 1:25 PM, Ronald Bonica wrote: >> >>> On October 10, 2011, the IESG issued a last call for comments regarding draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request-09 (IANA Reserved IPv4 Prefix for Shared CGN Space). While the community did not display consensus supporting the draft, it also did not display consensus against the draft. Therefore, I will submit the draft to the full IESG for its consideration at its December 1 teleconference. The draft will be published as a BCP if a sufficient number of IESG members ballot "Yes" or "No Objection", and if no IESG member ballots "Discuss". >> >> Regardless of whether or not IESG members support the allocation in this document, it is *not* a BCP. There is no current practice in this area; if there was, any of the /10s being used could be used. RFC 5735 is a BCP because the addressed listed were already known to be used for the purposes described; draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request is, as its title says, a request for a new allocation. >> >> If the IESG decides to publish this document, please be forthright and call it a Proposed Standard. >> >> --Paul Hoffman >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf mailing list >> Ietf@xxxxxxxx >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf