[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: Proposed IESG Statement on the Conclusion of Experiments

Hi Adrian,
At 13:31 19-04-2012, Adrian Farrel wrote:
The IESG has been discussing how to tidy up after Experimental RFCs.


The IESG would welcome your thoughts on this draft before they approve
the final text on April 26th.

Could the IESG defer approval by a month for the case study?

- if appropriate, deprecate any IANA code points allocated for the

This requires careful review.

- may request that the Experimental RFC is moved to Historic status.

If there is no energy in the community for the producing such an
Informational RFC, if the authors have moved on to other things, or if
the Working Group has been closed down, Area Directors should author or
seek volunteers to author such an Informational RFC.

It seems to me that any decision on this without adequate consideration could be described as somewhat hasty. If the IESG feels strongly about this, it should do this through a BCP as the side-effects can be more than just procedural.

A well-known company referenced an Experimental RFC for its implementation which was published around 10 years ago. That RFC was obsoleted by a Proposed Standard. Although it may sound sensible to move an Experimental RFC to Historic status, this involves RFCs which can be over 15 years old. Historic has somewhat of a reputation within the IETF.


[IETF Annoucements]     [IETF Obscurity Interest]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux]     [Pilates]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]

Add to Google