Better yet would be late binding: <INSERT LATEST IETF STANDARD FIXED
BOILERPLATE>.
- Ralph
On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 15:28 -0700, Bob Hinden wrote:
Dave,
Here's my own take:
It is empty bureaucracy. It is form, without content. It is additional
effort, with no benefit.
It is reasonable and necessary to require that documents contain
important considerations. This is not accomplished by having pro forma
sections lacking content.
I am not a big fan of a lot of the current boiler plate. I would be happy
if I could submit drafts with <INSERT IETF STANDARD FIXED BOILERPLATE> and
have it done automatically instead of having to figure out what the boiler
plate text to add is.
I think the the IANA Considerations section is different as it's contents
vary (unlike things like the copyright statement). The argument to
requiring it even if there aren't any required IANA actions is similar to
why protocols with NACKs don't work. The IANA needs to know in a positive
manner that the author considered it. The lack of an IANA considerations
section is ambiguous.
Bob
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf