[rfc-i] Possible new text re I-Ds [RFC citations committee I-D issued]

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Sat Feb 12 09:17:19 PST 2011

On 2/12/11 8:09 AM, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
>> How does adding the number change the state of the ID? It's still "work
>> in progress" (or a "working draft").
> the point is that you are not saying 'look at this specific document'
> you do not want to do that because the document is likely to be replaced by
> an update even before your RFC can be published - 2026 wanted to have
> references that had to be relied on to be stable
> the text out of 2026 says
>     Note: It is acceptable to reference a standards-track specification
>     that may reasonably be expected to be published as an RFC using the
>     phrase "Work in Progress"  without referencing an Internet-Draft.
>     This may also be done in a standards track document itself  as long
>     as the specification in which the reference is made would stand as a
>     complete and understandable document with or without the reference to
>     the "Work in Progress".

As has been pointed out before, however, there are multiple reasons for 
an RFC or other document to point to Internet Drafts. One set of reasons 
would point to a specific draft, another set of reasons would point to 
all the drafts in a named progression. 2026 appears to only have 
envisioned the latter case.

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list