On 23 Nov, 2009, at 09:11, Cullen Jennings wrote:
Pretty much all the emails I have received on this have suggested
we should just go publish it now. To be clear, I was not talking
about forming a WG to go do a standards track version of this. I
was talking about clicking one flag in the data tracker and
changing it from information to standards track and publishing the
draft "as is" as standards track.
I support this, with one modification: I don't think we need to
commit to publishing this draft literally "as is".
People like Dave Cridland have pointed out legitimate style
criticisms, which I'm happy to fix in the next couple of weeks.
As I'm sure you know (but others may not) a Standards-Track RFC
doesn't need a Working Group. It's possible to have an Individual
Submission Standards-Track RFC, subject to the IETF community
reviewing it and finding it to be worthwhile, and this would not be
the first time I've done that. Last year we published RFC 5227, "IPv4
Address Conflict Detection", as an Individual Submission Standards-
Track RFC.
I think Multicast DNS easily meets criteria for Proposed Standard. In
fact, in terms of stability, maturity, deployment, number of
independent implementations, etc., it easily meets criteria that for
other protocols would qualify them for Draft Standard status.
When other Standards-Track RFCs and other standards bodies (ECMA,
WiFi alliance, ISO/IEC, XMPP, etc.) need to reference Multicast DNS,
having a Standards-Track document to reference helps avoid procedural
objections.
Stuart Cheshire <cheshire(_at_)apple(_dot_)com>
* Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Inc.
* Internet Architecture Board
* www.stuartcheshire.org
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf