On 05 Mar 2011, at 01:35 , Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
I'd like to ask how was it done, what procedures were used.
Existing IETF procedures were used, as best I understand,
which shows that we do NOT need any new procedures.
As I noted, that use happened to have an incorrect result,
because people on the IESG were apparently unaware of
the widespread use of that specification (albeit within
private networks on nearly all continents, rather than
on the global Internet).
Many protocols are used primarily or exclusively within
private networks. As many people have already said here,
it is impossible to measure such usage, which means mistakes
are likely. Better to leave things alone.
I agree with you here - IETF does not have the authority
on the RFCs from other streams. For IAB, IRTF and IS
streams it is clear, but as for pre-IETF ones?
Also quite clear. Pre-IETF RFCs should be left alone.
Again, I do not believe this document is fixable.
I think it should be dropped, as should further
discussion of publishing this document.
Yours,
Ran
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf