Re: I-D Action:draft-hoffman-tao4677bis-00.txt

[Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman at vpnc.org>]

At 12:50 PM +1300 1/18/08, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>  >    Added sentences to section 8.1 explaining that BCPs and FYIs are sub-
> >     series of Informational RFCs. 
>
> Namely:
>
> >     The sub-series of FYIs and
> >     BCPs are comprised of "Informational documents" in the sense of the
> >     enumeration above, with special tagging applied.
>
> That's certainly true of the FYI series (which I believe the
> RFC Editor regards as dormant today).
>
> It absolutely is not true of the BCP series - they are
> single-stage normative documents, and not a subset of
> Informational documents. If there's text in RFC 2026 that
> implies otherwise, I need to update draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes
> again.

Note that Section 8.1 (which currently doesn't mention BCPs at all, 
and thus the needed change) talks about "Informational documents", 
not "Informational RFCs". That might be too clever of a 
differentiation.

Would you be happier if the list above the text you quoted had seven 
entries instead of six, with "Best current practices (BCP) documents" 
as a new entry in the list?

Personally, I don't feel that RFC 2026 is clear enough on the status 
of BCPs, and we thus have BCPs whose meaning differs from what 2026 
says BCPs are for. I don't think we can change 2026 in a way that 
won't invalidate some BCPs.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

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