On Apr 16, 2014, at 5:01 PM, Wesley Eddy <wes(_at_)mti-systems(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 4/16/2014 9:31 AM, Thomas Clausen wrote:
FWIW, my personal belief is that "running code" should be a
requirement for anything going std. track -- and that a (mandatory)
period as Experimental prior to go std. track would yield the stable
spec against which to reasonably build code, and run
(interoperability) tests, fix bugs, etc. If after (pulling a number
out my hat here) a year as Experimental there's no running code, then
that's probably a good indicator, also, as to if this is something
the IETF should bother doing....
If there's no running code, or pretty concrete plans and commitments
to get there, then there's really no need for an Experimental RFC that
will get a number and last forever. An I-D that expires in direct
conjunction with the interest and energy in it is just fine.
Except that an I-D usually doesn’t get IANA allocations, so you use a number
from the private space, and you have to coordinate with anyone who wants to
interoperate about which private number to use.