ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Why old-standards (Re: List of Old Standards to be retired)

2004-12-20 13:09:06
Hi -

From: "Bruce Lilly" <blilly(_at_)erols(_dot_)com>
To: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: Why old-standards (Re: List of Old Standards to be retired)
...
1. annual review of hundreds or thousands of standards in an
   organization comprised primarily of volunteers is not
   practical.  IEEE had, in the mid-90s, a 5-year review
   policy (as I understand it, tied to an ANSI cycle tied
   to an ISO cycle), and was rather far behind in its efforts
   to review (and reaffirm, supersede, or obsolete) old
   standards (some which were still deemed useful had
   vacuum-tube circuit diagrams as examples of implementation).
   The effort required by the review period needs to be
   consistent with the availability of qualified and motivated
  worker bees that will perform the review.
...

Obviously, YMMV.  In INCITS T3, the periodic review of ISO standards
didn't require too much effort.  The ISO periodic review simply required
answering a very short list of mostly yes-no questions, like "Is this
standard in use in industry," concluded with a retain/revise/withdraw
recommendation.  With the exception of the withdrawal of ASN.1
in favor of what many of us no-so-jokingly called ASN.2, it worked
fairly well, at least in the areas where I was active.

However, I think it's a mistake to compare this effort to the ISO periodic
review.  Procedurally, this is much more comparable to the rules for
progressing from CD / FCD to DIS (and eventually to IS).

Randy



_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>