Murry,
I think I agree that a wiki page for every RFC is too chaotic an idea to
be workable.
I agree with the thought that the suggestion under consideration could
usefully be amended as "a wiki page for every RFC that needs one".
If I write a specification, it's published as an RFC, and we don't need to
say much else, we don't need a wiki page for that.
I'd like to suggest an amendment as "a wiki page for every protocol that
needs one".
One of our problems is that we haven't come up with a useful way of grouping
specifications that, taken together, describe a protocol, at some specific
point in time. STDs should have been that grouping, but the failure for so
many standards-track specifications to advance to full Standard made STDs
much less relevant in the IETF as we have it today.
When we've done summary documents for protocols that have been massively
extended over one or more decades (I'm most familiar with TCP - RFC 4614 -
and SIP - RFC 5411), I think those have been very useful, but they tend to
be published once - they aren't living descriptions of the protocol as it
evolves.
Perhaps we should be thinking about how we maintain our body of corporate
knowledge at the protocol level, which is not necessarily the individual RFC
level.
Spencer
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf