[rfc-i] what about draft-peterson-informational-normativity ?
jon.peterson at neustar.biz
Wed Aug 20 12:34:58 PDT 2014
When I wrote this (terrifyingly seven years ago now), this was a bit of a
pain point for us on the IESG, as we were seeing a lot of needless
normative references and the down ref procedures were relatively new and
The reaction, if I recall, was that this wasn't enough of a problem for
the community as a whole for it to rise above a "meh." No one expressed
any grievances with content (albeit a few people found the snarky
"informational-normativity" draft title unhelpful), but there was no fire
If this would solve some problem today, I could certainly reissue the
draft, and fix the examples that seem to have been swallowed in malformed
CDATAs or something. But otherwise I'm happy to let it rest eternally in
the graveyard of "meh."
On 8/19/14, 6:36 PM, "=JeffH" <Jeff.Hodges at KingsMountain.com> wrote:
>I recently got clued-in to this innaresting and seemingly useful
>(technically expired) I-D...
> Normative Language and References
>..it nominally seems to be topically relevant -- might it be ressurected?
>unfortunately I'm buried, otherwise I'd volunteer )
>rfc-interest mailing list
>rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest