[rfc-i] RFC citations committee I-D issued

Marshall Eubanks tme at americafree.tv
Fri Feb 11 11:38:51 PST 2011


On Feb 11, 2011, at 2:24 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> Scott,
> 
> You're correct, but our topic here is really: given that
> someone decides to cite an I-D, what should the citation
> look like?
> 

The IETF could allow (or create) an outside entity* to create a non-RFC publication series, say "Technical Notes," to allow for publication of I-Ds that do not reach RFC status but are none-the-less interesting, if only as an example of what path not to take. 

The boiler plate could include something like 

"This document is not standards setting and is published solely for the historical record."

*Of course, I would not claim that people wouldn't publish such, and claim it had the IETF's blessing, but the
damage IMO would be lessened if it was done by a third party. 

Regards
Marshall


> I just looked at RFC 1380... an interesting example.
> Some of the references are very interesting historically.
> How can I find them?
> 
> Regards
>   Brian
> 
> On 2011-02-12 08:16, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
>> There is a basic question that I've not seen asked in this discussion:
>> what is the reason that someone wants to cite an ID in an RFC?
>> 
>> if the reason is to explore the development of a technology (version 2
>> said this but by version 6 it had changed to ...), then citing the
>> specific ID by name (including version number) make a lot of sense
>> because the reference is to the document in which a particular
>> technology refinement was introduced
>> 
>> if the reason is to say that a particular technical concept was
>> introduced on a particular date, (a variant on the above) then
>> citing the specific ID by name make a lot of sense because the
>> reference is to the document in which the technology was introduced
>> 
>> if the reason is to discuss the technology in an abandoned ID (for
>> example an ID series that was abandoned by a working group and will
>> never be published as a RFC) then citing the specific ID by name make a
>> lot of sense to ensure that the reader gets the same version the RFC is
>> discussing
>> 
>> but if the purpose is reference a technology under development, for
>> example as being relevant to your RFC, then citing the specific ID by
>> name makes no sense since the reference will likely be out of date by
>> the time the RFC ever gets published
>> 
>> I suggest that the question of allowing ID filenames in RFCs is not a
>> yes/no question - some logic should be applied as to why the document is
>> being cited
>> 
>> this is entirely unrelated to the question of whether the IETF should
>> stop pretending that IDs evaporate at some arbitrary point in time or if
>> the tools website is stable or not
>> 
>> Scott
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> rfc-interest mailing list
>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
> 



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list