At 12:50 PM +1300 1/18/08, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Added sentences to section 8.1 explaining that BCPs and FYIs are sub-
series of Informational RFCs.
Namely:
The sub-series of FYIs and
BCPs are comprised of "Informational documents" in the sense of the
enumeration above, with special tagging applied.
That's certainly true of the FYI series (which I believe the
RFC Editor regards as dormant today).
It absolutely is not true of the BCP series - they are
single-stage normative documents, and not a subset of
Informational documents. If there's text in RFC 2026 that
implies otherwise, I need to update draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes
again.
Note that Section 8.1 (which currently doesn't mention BCPs at all,
and thus the needed change) talks about "Informational documents",
not "Informational RFCs". That might be too clever of a
differentiation.
Would you be happier if the list above the text you quoted had seven
entries instead of six, with "Best current practices (BCP) documents"
as a new entry in the list?
Personally, I don't feel that RFC 2026 is clear enough on the status
of BCPs, and we thus have BCPs whose meaning differs from what 2026
says BCPs are for. I don't think we can change 2026 in a way that
won't invalidate some BCPs.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf