> DOIs are the opposite of what the IETF works for: the technical > standard is not freely available (88 swiss francs and I cannot > redistribute it), not developed in an open way, and it is managed by > an opaque private corporation (what about <https://open-stand.org/>). So you would oppose the use of (say) ASN.1 in RFCs, not because of its complexity but because the specification is not available under comparable license to that of RFCs? I'm curious to understand if your opposition to DOIs is fundamentally different from similar discussions we've had in the IETF over the years concerning reference to non-free specifications. Cheers Leif