ISSUE: Document subseries name for IETF Administration

Bob Braden braden at ISI.EDU
Mon Jun 16 11:19:12 CEST 2003

  *> I've been studying the most recent draft of 2223bis
  *> (draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-05.txt) and it is becoming clear to
  *> me that having a document with as much procedural impact as that
  *> one published as "informational" is a distortion.  Similarly, it
  *> seems to me that, despite a number of precedents to the
  *> contrary, we should be reserving "BCP" for _network_ Best
  *> Practices and not using it for IETF dministrative documents.
  *> Problem: there is no appropriate document series into which to
  *> put IETF Administrative documents so that they can be
  *> conveniently located and properly identified without creating
  *> confusion with documents that describe, or specify best
  *> practices for, the network.

John, speaking strictly for myself, I find this issue at most
unimportant.  I don't see that we have a problem with the present
situation, and I wonder why the IETF should spend any of its
cycles trying to fix something that is not broken.  Goodness
knows, there are lots of (technical) things that ARE broken
in the IETF sphere.

Bob Braden

More information about the Problem-statement mailing list