RE: [INDEP] Re: RFC Editor RFP Review Request

["Yaakov Stein" <yaakov_s at rad.com>]

>	Your last statement - that a break in the series would
invalidate it - argues very forcibly that no such "gap" can be allowed
to occur going forward (unless you are of the opinion that IP, TCP, UDP
etc. are "done evolving").  Hence, something would have to take the
place of the IETF and the RFC series practically immediately.


What I said was that a gap in standards-track RFCs would render the
series useless.
Were we to be foolish enough to allow a prolonged hiatus in the RFC
series,
there would be other SDOs more than willing to take over
maintenance and extension of the IP suite,
of course labeling the resulting standards "Implementation Agreements"
or 
"Recommendations" instead of "RFCs".

More importantly, later IETF work (even if called "RFCs")
would not be readily viewed as a natural evolution of the original IP
standards,
and would require us to actively market them.

Y(J)S

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf