On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 15:35:31 -0700
Stephan Wenger <stewe(_at_)stewe(_dot_)org> wrote:
The IETF might view it this way. Large parts of the
(standardization) world does not. One example in my field of work is
FLUTE, and the surrounding infrastructure of frameworks and FEC
codes. To the best of my recollection, these specifications were
originally issued as Experimental RFCs, for reasons of congestion
control worries. (They are also heavily encumbered, but that was not
really an issue according to my recollection.) The Experimental
status did not stop 3GPP and other SDOs to normatively reference
them, and treat them just like any other IETF RFC. Note that 3GPP
could NOT do that with a journal publication... I could name more
examples, both when it comes to referencing SDOs and referenced RFC
types (including normative references to at least Historic, Obsolete,
Informational).
This is, I think, the second- or third-most-common topic on the IETF
list: should we rename the document series to prevent that... (#1 is
non-ASCII formats for RFCs; #2 -- by volume of postings, rather than
frequency of discussion -- might be IPR.)
Other than giving up the RFC label for Experimental documents, it's
hard to see what the IETF can do.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf