[rfc-i] Status of draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis?

[Paul Hoffman / VPNC]

At 11:49 AM -0700 6/10/04, Bob Braden wrote:
>It may be formally true, but it does not reflect reality.  The reality
>is this:
>
>(1) the RFC Editor has generally taken a go-slow attitude on
>publishing 2223bis.  We lived for many years with 2223 as it became
>more and more out of date.  We have wanted to wait for a period of
>stability before publishing its successor.  In the meantime, the I-D
>pointed to by the RFC Editor web page provides a living document
>with the latest information.  We have thought this sufficient
>to bridge the gap for the time being.

A few things here:

- This sets a really bad precedent. It is almost exactly akin to 
"create your protocol from the Internet Draft that we will keep 
renewing; we're not going to bother to get an RFC".

- The draft expired many months ago, and is only being kept alive 
because of its status in the queue. Again, a bad precedent for the 
rest of the IETF.

- The link from the RFC Editor's page seems to be broken. 
<ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc-editor/instructions2authors.txt> 
doesn't get me anything.

>(2) events and people have put a great deal of pressure on the RFC
>Editor recently, and we have limited resources.  Some staff members
>already put in significant unpaid effort because they believe in the
>effort.  We simply have not had time to do the next update.  We hope
>to do so before San Diego.

This is very confusing. From the ID Tracker, it looks like there is 
only one small outstanding issue; it should take less than half an 
hour to fix. Are there issues not listed on the tracker?

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium