On 30/10/2017 16:27, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> The existing downref process (RFC 3967) doesn't apply. That is to handle
>> references to
>> an RFC that is at a lower maturity - such as a normative reference to an
>> Informational or
>> Experimental RFC - or from an Internet Standard to a Proposed Standard.
>
> I couldn't find anything in 3967 to support that view (other than the
> parenthetical in the abstract). Maybe it's implicit.
The quote from RFC2026 in section 1 of RFC3967 is pretty unambiguous
when read in context - throughout RFC2026, "standards track" refers
to the IETF standards track, and "standards track specifications"
refers to IETF documents. And in any case the Abstract of RFC3967
sets the scope thus: "Exceptions to this rule are sometimes needed as
the IETF uses informational RFCs to describe non-IETF standards or
IETF-specific modes of use of such standards."
My main concern with the new proposal is other:
> 1. Is it stable, mature, and immutable (except for errata)?
Those are not well known characteristics of open source projects.
Even if we tie a reference down to a very specific version,
I'm unclear how that can truly act as a stable reference. It may
be stable in a mathematical sense, but it may also be seven years
behind deployed reality.
Brian