Folks -
I've recently been asked to review a number of works in progress related to
restructuring and other similar things. Those documents were liberally
splattered with references to various
IDs (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-newtrk-cruft-00.txt,
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-newtrk-repurposing-isd-00.txt,
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wasserman-iasa-bcp-01.txt
etc). Its unclear that either the work in progress or the cited drafts
will ever be published as RFCs. Its also unclear that this (restructuring
etc) will be resolved within the 6 month lifetime of any given ID. Its
also unclear that we can afford to either have these expire, or continually
resubmit them. And finally, we NEED to have this set of documents as
permanent archivable documents to maintain the historical record.
It seems to me that neither ID status nor RFC status are appropriate for
these documents. The ID series is, by design, ephemeral and generally not
citeable. The RFC series is stable and citeable, but the lead time for
introducing an RFC is somewhat north of 30 days or more.
I hate to open Pandora's box, but what I think we need is a citable, stable
document series that has a production lead time similar to that of the
IDs. I would probably limit this to the non-technical administrivia we've
been recently inundated with.
*sigh*
Mike
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf