Subject: [tcpm] Re: draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-antispoof-01.txt

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 20:27:15 +0200 (EET)

On Sat, 8 Oct 2005, Joe Touch wrote:
>> 8.1. Normative References
>>
>>    As this is not a standards document, this section has no meaning.
>>
>> ==> Normative means more than just what's what's MUST or MUST not for a
>> standard document.  It also means 1) "documents which should be read and
>> understood by the reader of this document in order to understand this
>> document" and 2) "documents which should be published as stable references
>> before this document gets published as RFC".
>>
>> I think there are a number of references in category 1).  There are also a
>> couple of others in category 2),e.g., tcpmd5app-01, ikev2/AH, dccp.
>
> Although I personally agree with you (esp. w.r.t. #1) I've had this
> debate before, and my understanding is that "normative" in the IETF
> means "refers to a standard to enable a a specificiation". Since this
> isn't a spec (standards track), there can be no normative refs.
>
> If that's not the case, however, somebody in authority holler. ;-)
>
> My original wording was a bit sarcastic in response to that
> understanding, so it has been downgraded to 'None.'

FWIW,

There's extensive precedent for having Normative references for 
Informational documents and the IESG not barking on that.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 10:45:07 -0800

> Informational documents and the IESG not barking on that.

The IESG isn't the one that barks (they're asleep - consider the TCP
roadmap and discussion on the normative ref to an ID); it's the
RFC-Editor pass that catches these.

Joe

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 20:50:26 +0200 (EET)

On Sun, 6 Nov 2005, Joe Touch wrote:
>> There's extensive precedent for having Normative references [in]

(Sorry, above I wrote "Normative references for", I meant to write 
"Normative references in".)

There is also extensive precedent for having norm references in 
informational documents and the RFC-editor appears to be fine with 
that.

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 13:42:01 -0800

Pekka Savola wrote:
> informational documents and the RFC-editor appears to be fine with that.

Some. The larger issue is what it means to have a normative ref in a doc
that isn't itself a spec. Normative means 'referring to another spec in
a dependent way'. Sure, the other part is a spec - but how can a
non-spec 'depend' on a spec?

Joe