Re: Silly TLS Auth lobbying

[Masataka Ohta <mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>]

RJ Atkinson wrote:

> Some important things that the FSF folks seem NOT to understand,
> and frankly seem to aggressively NOT want to understand, are:
> 
> - Many RFCs are *not* on the IETF standards track.
> 
> - Any "Experimental RFC" is *not* on the IETF standards track.
>   So there is no "endorsement" by IETF in publishing such.

A lot more silly fact, these days, is that all the published RFCs
require IESG "endorsement".

That being so, I fully agree with FSF folks against publication of
silly RFCs.

> I support the idea that virtually any document ought to be able
> to be published as an Informational RFC or Experimental RFC.

I do agree with the idea.

And, it was the real practice in good old days when Jon was the
RFC editor.

							Masataka Ohta



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