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

From: Paul Hoffman / VPNC <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 09:56:35 -0800

If the ISD effort "works well", then I think the de-kruft work (other 
than amending 2026 to get rid of the forward-motion timers) is 
unneeded.

In reading the messages from people mostly outside this WG, I get the 
feeling that marking things historic is viewed as laying on a 
negative label. We could try to change that perception, but it's not 
clear whether doing that work is worth the effort. Similarly, it 
seems that because there is no clear description of what is to be 
marked historic, people want "us" to do it based on that negative 
value.

On the other hand, I get the feeling that the ISD work would be 
widely appreciated even where people disagree with the groupings. A 
few years out, if we have ISDs covering most of the actively-used 
standards-track protocols, the need to label something "historic" 
would be somewhat irrelevant. Standards which are not even mentioned 
in any ISD will more rarely be considered for use by implementers.

My preference would be for us to focus on ISDs, not on marking things 
as historic. I fully understand that this means that we still have a 
bit of work to do with respect the historic issue, namely amending 
2026 to deal with the forward-motion timers. I think that is 
important work because it is important that we act the way we say we 
will.

--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

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 09:30:10 +0100

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

- Alistair

Paul Hoffman / VPNC <[email-masked]>
Sent by: [email-masked]
19/12/2004 18:56
Please respond to Paul Hoffman / VPNC
 
        To:     [email-masked]
        cc: 
        Subject:        [newtrk] Thoughts on the relationship between 
kruft and ISDs

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
.