On 1/31/2014 8:55 AM, Scott Brim wrote:
First, there are good arguments for publication as Informational , but
since it incrementally adds to BCP 72, it should be incorporated
there, so BCP is slightly better.
It does?
It does not say it does.
So that linkage is something the reviewer is creating.
At the least, a claim that it does "add to" BCP 72 invites further
debate about the nature and implications of the update.
Again, making this a BCP confuses the nature of the document with those
that give substantive operational guidance.
This document does exactly what it should: It defines the topic and it
says the IETF considers the topic important. It calls for practices,
but doesn't -- and shouldn't -- define them.
The job of providing substantive details about IETF practices associated
with the topic will come later.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net