Subject: Re: [newtrk] Thoughts on the relationship between kruft and ISDs

From: Paul Hoffman / VPNC <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:35:14 -0800

At 9:30 AM +0100 12/20/04, [email-masked] wrote:
>Speaking a bit as an outsider, do you mean the once ISDs become 
>"normal" then the label "RFC" returns to simply mean a "genuine" 
>request for comments and hence the only "real" deliverables from 
>IETF are the ISDs?

No. That might happen and it might not, but I'm not aiming there. I'm 
simply saying that the primary goal of de-krufting, to alert 
developers which standards are no loner "active", is a direct 
by-product of the ISD work.

>   If you don't mean that then what happens to non-decrufted RFCs 
>that are not covered by an ISD label?

Nothing. That is, a protocol that isn't covered by an ISD still 
lives, it just doesn't get scrutiny, support, and recognition. Anyone 
who cares about that protocol could try to ISDize it.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
.
newtrk resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html