IETF mission (RE: pausable explanation for the Document Series)

john.loughney at john.loughney at
Fri Jun 6 08:56:29 CEST 2003

Hi Charles,

> I also wholeheartedly support the inclusion of an applicability
> statement whenever it makes sense.  However, I also suggest that
> the protocol SHOULD (within engineering discretion) not intentionally
> restrict its applcability to the situations delineated in the
> applicability statement.
> I would restate Postel's maxim:
> Be conservative in the claimed applicability, but generous
> in the potential applicability.

What I am concerned about is there seems to be a movement to
make a super-PS, one which would be the equavalent of a DS
& have no bugs.  I am not sure of the feasibility of this,
but I have noticed that simple protocol documents are getting
overloaded with a lot of applicability info, deployment concerns,
best practices and implementation guides.  Somehow, I think
overloading a single document with this info, is not a 
reciepe for success.


More information about the Problem-statement mailing list