Return-Path: Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([unix socket]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Cyrus v2.1.11-Mandrake-RPM-2.1.11-1mdk) with LMTP; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:45:04 +0100 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86DA561BAE for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:45:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 17958-06 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:45:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from montage.altserver.com (montage.altserver.com [63.247.74.122]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA3CE61BB0 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:44:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from lns-p19-8-idf-82-65-68-107.adsl.proxad.net ([82.65.68.107] helo=jfc.afrac.org) by montage.altserver.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1Cogvq-0005tv-Jj; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:44:59 -0800 Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050112111141.0dd54080@mail.jefsey.com> X-Sender: jefsey+jefsey.com@mail.jefsey.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:22:04 +0100 To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand , ietf@ietf.org From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" Subject: Re: Definitions, names, and confusion In-Reply-To: <56952096465BAB0299C94D41@gloppen.hjemme.alvestrand.no> References: <200501112001.37495.blilly@erols.com> <56952096465BAB0299C94D41@gloppen.hjemme.alvestrand.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-2FE02643 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - montage.altserver.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - alvestrand.no X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jefsey.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no At 09:10 12/01/2005, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: >actually the BCP label has multiple, largely disjunct areas of coverage. > >I once (many years back) suggested splitting the categories into >Recommended Internet Practices and Directives for Oversight and >Administration, but the acronyms didn't survive the laugh test.... I suppose this is not only the laugh test but the consistency test; both also are using words of authority ("Recommeded" and "Directive"). A BCP definition makes it a cultural/procedural equivalent to an accepted Standard. This is why I proposed "Documented Best Practices" (DCP) and a "Suggested Best Practice" (SCP) as simple mnemonics to compare with the "for information" and usual proposition concepts the Common Practice area is not permitted. jfc