Re: Experimental track

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>]

On 2007-11-01 23:49, Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Dan Riley wrote:
>  
> > there is some evidence that people presumably well versed in
> > IETF process and RFC2026 terminology can be sloppy in its 
> > application--from
>  
> > http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg04120.html
> [...]
> > | The IESG solicits final comments on whether the IETF community
> > | has consensus to publish draft-housley-tls-authz-extns as an
> > | _experimental standard_ given the IPR claimed.
>  
> > (_emphasis_ added)
>
> Brilliant.  

Yes, but pretty clearly a cut-and-paste error. I agree
that we can't expect non-participants to correct that error.

> While they were at it they also sanctioned a new 
> "experimental track".  IANA will be thrilled when I ask them
> to implement "experimental standard" RFC 2345 because it's 
> on "experimental track" suited for the IDN TLD experiment.

There's nothing new about that phrase; a quick Google finds usage
going back to 1998 at least.

    Brian

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