I disagree with this change of status. Documents that refer to this RFC
informationally would all need to be considered for potential impact.
This does not seem to be an appropriate change. If a BCP were
appropriate, a bis revision should be the mechanism for upgrading the
impact of the content.
Joe
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Last Call: Recognising RFC1984 as a BCP
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 10:13:06 -0700
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Reply-To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
The IESG has received a request from an individual participant to make
the following status changes:
- RFC1984 from Informational to Best Current Practice
(IAB and IESG Statement on Cryptographic Technology and the Internet)
The supporting document for this request can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-rfc1984-to-best-current-practice/
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2015-09-07. Exceptionally, comments
may be
sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
The affected document can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc1984/
IESG discussion of this request can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/status-change-rfc1984-to-best-current-practice/ballot/
_______________________________________________
saag mailing list
saag(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag