Re: 2026, draft, full, etc.

[Dave Crocker <dhc2 at dcrocker.net>]

Almost makes one think that our standards labeling scheme needs some
simplification.

One might even imagine that the only label after Proposed should be one which
means "is now in widespread use".

So we would have Proposed mean "has undergone technical review" and Full means 
"has gained public acceptance".

d/


Ned Freed wrote:
> The main barrier to IMAP moving to draft is the large number of normative
> references that first need to move first. Getting RFC 2822 to draft is a
> necessary first step and we're working on that. But what about TLS? The
> now-widespread use of TLS+plain has solved a lot of problems for appplications
> but has created a serious obstacle to standards track advancement.
>
> Perhaps a downreference exception needs to be made here, but if so that needs
> to be approved in advance because nobody is going to bother going through all
> the pain of documenting interoperability without first being sure that a
> normative reference issue isn't going to render their work meaningless.


--

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net



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