[rfc-i] Format for STDs, BCPs, FIYs
sm at resistor.net
Sun Aug 19 06:12:33 PDT 2012
At 08:46 18-08-2012, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>The file that describes the BCP or STD, regardless of format, might
>have another value: to give the history of the grouping. As a
>specific example, a reference to BCP 9 made in August of 2009 meant
>"RFC 2026". Two months later, it meant "RFC 2026 and RFC 5657", the
>latter of which has some valuable changes to the IETF process. This
>type of history would be valuable to someone who is looking at a
>reference to BCP 9 from, say, 2005.
What STD gives you is an updated reference to a standard (which may
be a set of RFCs). Instead of following the obsolete/update path,
you only have to specify STD x and leave it to the RFC Editor to keep
the set of RFCs up to date. The STD had an interesting
property. The underlying specification would not change
significantly unless the future of the Internet is at
stake. Nowadays, STDs are usually decrepit documents as it is
considered as a burden to maintain specifications.
BCPs are still perceived as valuable as a document that is labelled
as "Best Common Practice" must be best common practice. BCPs have
the property of making referencing easier.
The concatenation of more than on RFC is a lazy way to serve the BCP
or STD. It's convenient though as the RFC Editor does not have to
decide about format and other details. The document set property can
be useful from a maintenance and readability perspective.
More information about the rfc-interest