On 9/3/13 1:13 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 04/09/2013 04:16, Pete Resnick wrote:
On 9/3/13 9:32 AM, Bradner, Scott wrote:
...the 3rd paragraph in section 6.1.3...
Good catch. I'll switch the citation and the quote to the bit from
6.1.3, but I'll also note the removal of the piece in 2.1. I also found
a mention in the last paragraph of 3.3. I'll make sure to note in the
document that we're removing that too.
Here's what I've got as a replacement for section 1:
RFC 2026 [RFC2026] and its predecessors call for the publication of
an RFC describing the status of IETF protocols:
The RFC Editor shall publish periodically an "Internet Official
Protocol Standards" RFC [1], summarizing the status of all
Internet protocol and service specifications.
The "Internet Official Protocol Standards" document, now as RFC 5000
[RFC5000], has always been listed in the Internet Standard series as
STD 1. However, the document has not been kept up to date in recent
years, and it has fallen out of use in favor of the online list
produced by the RFC Editor [STDS-TRK]. The IETF no longer sees the
need for the document to be maintained. Therefore, this document
updates RFC 2026 [RFC2026], effectively removing the above mentioned
paragraph from section 6.1.3, along with the paragraph from section
2.1 that states:
The status of Internet protocol and service specifications is
summarized periodically in an RFC entitled "Internet Official
Protocol Standards" [1]. This RFC shows the level of maturity and
other helpful information for each Internet protocol or service
specification (see section 3).
and the paragraph from section 3.3 that states:
The "Official Protocol Standards" RFC (STD1) lists a general
requirement level for each TS, using the nomenclature defined in
this section. This RFC is updated periodically. In many cases,
more detailed descriptions of the requirement levels of particular
protocols and of individual features of the protocols will be
found in appropriate ASs.
Additionally, this document obsoletes RFC 5000 [RFC5000], the current
incarnation of that document, and requests that the IESG move that
document (and therefore STD 1) to Historic status.
Makes me go over 2 pages, but such is life.
and while you are at it - maybe you should remove the 2nd
paragraph in the same section
An official summary of standards actions completed and pending shall
appear in each issue of the Internet Society's newsletter. This
shall constitute the "publication of record" for Internet standards
actions.
should also be removed since that is not being done either
and it is not good to say we have a publication of record that
does not actually exist
I agree it should probably be removed. Should we replace it anything?
Maybe an informational statement that the current standards status is always
at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcxx00.html ? (Or whatever stable URL
the RFC Editor prefers to cite.)
I've fixed the reference to [STDS-TRK] so that it shows the URL. I'm not
sure we need to make further reference to it.
Thinking about this more, we're starting to drift afield of the purpose
of this document if we start removing that paragraph. Removing that
paragraph requires a different explanation than the rest. Speaking for
myself only, I'm leaning against dealing with it. Anyone want to speak
strongly for or against?
pr
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478