[rfc-i] Draft Review request - Pre-IETF RFCs Classifying Part I
evnikita2 at gmail.com
Mon Nov 29 08:17:47 PST 2010
29.11.2010 17:43, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> At 4:51 PM +0200 11/29/10, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>> 28.11.2010 13:32, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> On 28.11.2010 12:18, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>>>>> RFCs are immutable. We can ask the RFC Editor to update the RFC
>>>>> database, but the actual text in the RFCs is not going to change.
>>>> It is considered. But are there any way to mark the RFC with the
>>> What do you mean by "it is considered"?
>> It means that I know it. However I don't find any other way to mark RFC xxxx as<foo>, for instance.
>>>> 'ST. of th. Memo' section without changing it? And what would you say about
>>> I don't think so. The information on the RFC reflects the situation at time of publication, not the current one. For that, there's the RFC database.
>> But RFC 2026 has imperative rule: all RFCs are to be assigned as St. Tr. . . .
> I don't see this rule in RFC 2026. In fact, it says the opposite. That is why I am asking what is your motivation. Please quote the part of RFC 2026 that is motivating you to do this work that (as far as I know) no one has felt was needed in the 14 years since RFC 2026 was published.
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --VPN Consortium
Here is a citation from RFC 2026:
> Some RFCs document Internet Standards. These RFCs form the 'STD'
> subseries of the RFC series . When a specification has been
> adopted as an Internet Standard, it is given the additional label
> "STDxxx", but it keeps its RFC number and its place in the RFC
> series. (see section 4.1.3)
> Some RFCs standardize the results of community deliberations about
> statements of principle or conclusions about what is the best way to
> perform some operations or IETF process function. These RFCs form
> the specification has been adopted as a BCP, it is given the
> additional label "BCPxxx", but it keeps its RFC number and its place
> in the RFC series. (see section 5)
> Not all specifications of protocols or services for the Internet
> should or will become Internet Standards or BCPs. Such non-standards
> track specifications are not subject to the rules for Internet
> standardization. Non-standards track specifications may be published
> directly as "Experimental" or "Informational" RFCs at the discretion
> of the RFC Editor in consultation with the IESG (see section 4.2).
Here we have an exhaustive list of RFC categories. There is no mention
of any others
categories (except 'Historic') of RFC. I hope I have answered your question.
More information about the rfc-interest