[rfc-i] Fwd: Comment on headers-and-boilerplates
touch at ISI.EDU
Thu Jan 8 12:59:47 PST 2009
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 2009-01-09 06:23, Joe Touch wrote:
>> These statements are (mutually exclusively) useful, however:
>> This document is an independent submission.
>> This document is a product of the IETF.
>> This document is a product of the IRTF.
>> This document is a product of the IAB.
>> Stating what a document IS is sufficient. Stating what it is NOT is what
>> causes the concern, via the implication that being NOT from the IETF is
>> some sort of stamp of "unchecked".
> I agree, subject only to retaining the "not a standard of any kind"
> phrase in *all* non-standards track RFCs.
I agree. I.e., here's the text I would have, specifically:
This is an Internet standards-track document, and
describes an Internet standard in process.
This is not Internet standards-track document,
and does not define an Internet standard of any kind.
This document is an independent submission.
This document is a product of the IETF.
This document is a product of the IRTF.
This document is a product of the IAB.
For each or both in tandem, we could add "please see <document X> for
(the standards-track phrase may need wordsmithing, esp the term 'in
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the rfc-interest