RE: 2026, draft, full, etc.

I agree, but only partly.

A second pass on the documents does have a beneficial effect. This is 
particularly the case for older 'standards' where the documents simply don't 
match current requirements (no security, iana considerations for a start) and 
are often missing key folklore essential for interoperability.


Where I think the process goes wrong is that it applies to documents, not 
protocols. A lot of crud goes through the mill in the name of avoiding 
recycling at proposed. And when a major revision of an existing protocol is 
done the revision goes back to proposed before being promited to draft.
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eliot Lear [mailto:lear(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 6:18 AM
> To: Simon Josefsson
> Cc: IETF Discussion
> Subject: 2026, draft, full, etc.
>
> [I'm changing the subject and cutting off the references list 
> as we seem to have changed topic.]
>
> Simon,
>
> > DS designates a mature standard.  If you read the 
> requirements in RFC
> > 2026 for a mature standard it is clear that few of the modern IETF 
> > protocols live up to that standard -- you need to demonstrate 
> > interoperability between two completely independent 
> implementations of 
> > _all_ features in the protocol standard.
>
> I think we can all agree that the calendaring standard is 
> mature.  We are in the process of doing what I would consider 
> to be a relatively minor update to it, and yet it is only PS. 
>  IMAPv4 is only PS and yet has MASSIVE deployment.  LDAP is 
> only PS and is MASSIVELY deployed.  SIP is all over the place 
> and it is only PS as well.  And so it's pretty clear that 
> nobody cares about DS or IS.  What's more, why should they? 
> What benefit does it bring to anyone to advance a standard to 
> DS?  AND it's a whole lot of work.
>
> So why are we even having an argument about what gets stuck 
> into requirements for DS?  Shouldn't we instead be 
> eliminating it entirely?
>
> Eliot
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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