Re: draft-klensin-newtrk-8540style-harmful (and (and draft-roach-bis-documents-, etc.)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



John, I haven't read your whole document, and you mention
RFC 8540 specifically.  I'm guessing that this is the document that pushed
you to think about this?

>   The WG suggested in its summary for IETF
>   Last Call for what became RFC 8540 that an errata listing like that
>   provided by RFCs 4460 and 8540 is helpful in producing replacements
>   for the original documents [LC8540-Statement] but there is no
>   evidence that the same purpose could not be served by retaining the
>   same list as an Internet-Draft until the actual replacement document
>   is ready to be published and then either discarding that I-D or, if
>   the WG felt a need to do so, incorporating the errata listing as an
>   appendix in the final document.

As far as I can see, 8540 was produced by the tsvwg, and went through IETF
process. Yes, it's informational, rather than standards track ("Updates"),
but that seems somewhat immaterial to me.

I am not an expert in SCTP or the issues reported, but my guess is that the
situation is that the issues reported do not affect all users, but that they
affect enough that having some clear text is useful.

What you suggest, that it remain an ID would seem to me, to elevate IDs to be
equivalent to RFCs.

I couldn't puzzle out what your Conclusion was.  Maybe if you'd dealt with
another example, it would help.    I was involved in NEWTRK, and I think you
probably need to hit the reader over the head harder here.

||ugh Daniel's once lamented that it every software release needs a label so
that one can refer to it properly, but that it's often hard to know which
releases are good ones until after they get a label.   He described what he
wanted was a kind of "weather report", which tells you how things worked out
earlier in the "day".   I think that you (and NEWTRK) are really asking for
this.

It seems to me that RFC8540 needs to be a weather report, and that we really
need a new kind of document for this.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux