Subject: RE: [newtrk] one size fits all vs two-step

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2005 10:28:26 +0300

Pekka,

> I read both draft-loughney-newtrk-one-size-fits-all-00.txt and
> draft-carpenter-newtrk-twostep-00.txt.
> 
> I like twostep much more, because it still includes a notion that obtaining
> interoperability information is important, and if a spec has
> knobs which aren't used or or implemented, at least the fact should be
> documented if those can't be reasonably removed.

For the one-step, the process for handling this would be to simply revise
the spec.  It is entirely reasonable to revise specs in order to remove
knobs.  
 
> In section 6, both state that downrefing an internet-draft would not be
> allowed; I assume this also applies to Informational/Experimental
> RFCs.

Normatively downrefing to Info/Exp. should not be allowed, IMO.

John

.
newtrk resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2005 10:39:06 +0300 (EEST)

> the spec.  It is entirely reasonable to revise specs in order to remove

Indeed.  Howeve, why I liked two-step was that specs that have 
bothered to do that step will be able to get special status.  Maybe 
this would encourage folks to go through that step.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
.
newtrk resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 17:11:43 +0200

> Normatively downrefing to Info/Exp. should not be allowed, IMO.

I kind of like the statement in RFC 3967 on this:

3967 Clarifying when Standards Track Documents may Refer Normatively
     to Documents at a Lower Level. R. Bush, T. Narten. December 2004.
     (Format: TXT=12251 bytes) (Also BCP0097) (Status: BEST CURRENT
     PRACTICE)

There are lots of reasons that situations occur where it's a good idea to 
do so...... and reasons why it's not generally a good idea.

                 Harald

.