----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Braden" <braden(_at_)ISI(_dot_)EDU>
To: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>; <garmitage(_at_)swin(_dot_)edu(_dot_)au>
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: The IETF Mission
*> Is the standard for Informational currently that onerous?
Certainly not. But the community (and especially its chosen
leadership) need to believe in the importance of using Informational
to capture important documents and ideas as RFCs.
Bob Braden
Just to be clear - in
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg23935.html I made a
snotty remark wondering what the average time-to-publish from first
draft to RFC for Informational RFCs is.
I was trying to say what Bob said more clearly (first time that's
happened today, of course). If you look up "Informational RFC" in
2026, it's not that bad. If we lived in the world of 2026, we would
publish more of them, especially individual drafts. HIP Architecture
is a wonderful example of an Informational RFC-to-be.
Spencer