Mark,
FWIW, this came up in the dnsext working group a few years ago. In the
end, I don't think anything was done, which is kind of a shame. A lot of
old protocols could benefit by "this is what is important" documents
(search the RFCs for "FTP" or "TELNET" to get some examples of protocols
with lots and lots of RFCs that make it hard to decipher).
Even worse for actual operators who may actually want to use the IETF
recommendations and not become IETF experts!
I'll join the <rfc-interest(_at_)rfc-editor(_dot_)org> list as Joel suggests,
although it seems quite chatty with procedural stuff. :-/
--
Shane
On Tue, 2011-03-01 at 22:01 +1100, Mark Nottingham wrote:
This is a very good question.
I've considered setting up a wiki page or similar to serve this purpose
for the HTTP family of specifications. However, it's not clear what
authority it would have, and it's not clear whether people would be
able to readily find it.
If we can find a way to do this, and to cut through the clutter of all
of the other information, it would be very helpful IMO. I'm not sure
where it would start, though.
Cheers,
On 01/03/2011, at 3:19 AM, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote:
________________________________________
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]
On Behalf Of Shane Kerr [shane(_at_)isc(_dot_)org]
My question is... how is this advice expected to trickle out into actual
use? There are more than 6000 RFCs, and they don't seem to be organized
in a useful way that I can find.
_______________________________________________
In practice, you have to be "up on the field", to be part of the ongoing
discussions. Other standards organizations are better organized about
publishing their recommendations, but always, in practice, you have to be
aware of what is being done by the systems you need to interoperate with.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf