to be pedantic - a BCP stands for the best way we know how to do something
it is not required that the process actually be in use before the BCP is adopted
as Mike O'Dell once said, if BCPs had to reflect what was actually being done
we
could never have a BCP defining good manners on the IETF mailing list
see RFC 2026 - it says
The BCP subseries of the RFC series is designed to be a way to
standardize practices and the results of community deliberations. A
BCP document is subject to the same basic set of procedures as
standards track documents and thus is a vehicle by which the IETF
community can define and ratify the community's best current thinking
on a statement of principle or on what is believed to be the best way
to perform some operations or IETF process function.
i.e, the IETF's "best current thinking" on the "best way" to do something - not
'describing the way something is done'
this has always been the case - e.g., RFC 6410 described a new standards track
not the (not well used) existing standards track
Scott
On Nov 29, 2011, at 10:43 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
On Nov 28, 2011, at 1:25 PM, Ronald Bonica wrote:
On October 10, 2011, the IESG issued a last call for comments regarding
draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request-09 (IANA Reserved IPv4 Prefix for
Shared CGN Space). While the community did not display consensus supporting
the draft, it also did not display consensus against the draft. Therefore, I
will submit the draft to the full IESG for its consideration at its December
1 teleconference. The draft will be published as a BCP if a sufficient
number of IESG members ballot "Yes" or "No Objection", and if no IESG member
ballots "Discuss".
Regardless of whether or not IESG members support the allocation in this
document, it is *not* a BCP. There is no current practice in this area; if
there was, any of the /10s being used could be used. RFC 5735 is a BCP
because the addressed listed were already known to be used for the purposes
described; draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request is, as its title says,
a request for a new allocation.
If the IESG decides to publish this document, please be forthright and call
it a Proposed Standard.
--Paul Hoffman
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf