idnits 2.17.1 draft-hoffman-id-references-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC7322, but the abstract doesn't seem to directly say this. It does mention RFC7322 though, so this could be OK. -- The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC2026, but the abstract doesn't seem to directly say this. It does mention RFC2026 though, so this could be OK. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year (Using the creation date from RFC2026, updated by this document, for RFC5378 checks: 1995-09-12) -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (November 23, 2015) is 3077 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Missing Reference: 'SYMBOLIC-TAG' is mentioned on line 141, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC-STYLE' is mentioned on line 148, but not defined ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 7322 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 4 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group P. Hoffman 3 Internet-Draft ICANN 4 Updates: 2026, 7322 (if approved) November 23, 2015 5 Intended status: Standards Track 6 Expires: May 26, 2016 8 Referencing Internet-Drafts in RFCs 9 draft-hoffman-id-references-01 11 Abstract 13 RFC 2026 places restrictions on how Internet-Drafts can be referred 14 to in RFCs. Over time, the way that the IETF community uses 15 sometimes make RFCs inaccurate (because many drafts that are referred 16 to are not actually "works in progress", and also make references to 17 Internet-Drafts nearly useless to RFC readers. This document updates 18 the one part of RFC 2026, and the one part of RFC 7322, that covers 19 referencing Internet-Drafts. 21 Status of This Memo 23 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 24 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 26 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 27 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 28 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 29 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 31 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 32 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 33 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 34 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 36 This Internet-Draft will expire on May 26, 2016. 38 Copyright Notice 40 Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 41 document authors. All rights reserved. 43 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 44 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 45 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 46 publication of this document. Please review these documents 47 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 48 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 49 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 50 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 51 described in the Simplified BSD License. 53 Table of Contents 55 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 56 2. Change to RFC 2026 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 57 3. Change to RFC 7322 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 59 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 60 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 61 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 62 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 64 1. Introduction 66 [RFC2026], "The Internet Standards Process - Revision 3", places 67 restrictions on how Internet-Drafts can be referred to in RFCs and 68 other Internet-Drafts. These restrictions were well-intentioned at 69 the time but now have become outdated. This document updates the 70 section of RFC 2026that restricts how Internet-Drafts can be 71 referenced. It also updates [RFC7322], "RFC Style Guide", to reflect 72 the changes from RFC 2026. 74 Note that this document narrowly updates just one section of 75 [RFC2026]. Earlier proposals to make the changes here were abandoned 76 because there was a belief that changing one part of RFC 2026 could 77 not be done without opening all of RFC 2026 to change, and that was 78 too onerous of a task. This document proves that a limited change 79 can be made to RFC 2026 without having to take on the many changes 80 that different people in the IETF community may or may not want. 82 2. Change to RFC 2026 84 The last paragraph of Section 2.2 of RFC 2026 says: 86 Note: It is acceptable to reference a standards-track specification 87 that may reasonably be expected to be published as an RFC using the 88 phrase "Work in Progress" without referencing an Internet-Draft. 89 This may also be done in a standards track document itself as long as 90 the specification in which the reference is made would stand as a 91 complete and understandable document with or without the reference to 92 the "Work in Progress". 94 This paragraph is replaced with: 96 It is acceptable to reference an Internet-Draft in another Internet- 97 Draft or RFC. Such a reference must be to a specific edition of an 98 Internet-Draft by indicating its full filename, such as "draft-ietf- 99 somewg-someprotocol-03". 101 3. Change to RFC 7322 103 Section 4.8.6.4 of RFC 7322, "Referencing Internet-Drafts", says: 105 ============ 107 References to Internet-Drafts may only appear as informative 108 references. Given that several revisions of an I-D may be produced 109 in a short time frame, references must include the posting date 110 (month and year), the full Internet-Draft file name (including the 111 version number), and the phrase "Work in Progress". Authors may 112 reference multiple versions of an I-D. If the referenced I-D was 113 also later published as an RFC, then that RFC must also be listed. 115 [SYMBOLIC-TAG] Last name, First initial., Ed. (if applicable) 116 and First initial. Last name, Ed. (if 117 applicable), "I-D Title", Work in Progress, 118 draft-string-NN, Month Year. 120 Example: 122 [RFC-STYLE] Flanagan, H. and S. Ginoza, "RFC Style Guide", 123 Work in Progress, draft-flanagan-style-01, 124 June 2013. 126 ============ 128 This section is replaced with: 130 ============ 132 References to Internet-Drafts may only appear as informative 133 references. Given that several revisions of an I-D may be produced 134 in a short time frame, references must include the posting date 135 (month and year), the full title, the full Internet-Draft file name 136 (including the version number), and a URL to that specific version of 137 the draft on the IETF Tools site. Authors may reference multiple 138 versions of an I-D. If the referenced I-D was also later published 139 as an RFC, then that RFC must also be listed. 141 [SYMBOLIC-TAG] Last name, First initial., Ed. (if applicable) 142 and First initial. Last name, Ed. (if applicable), 143 "I-D Title", draft-string-NN, Month Year, 144 . 146 Example: 148 [RFC-STYLE] Flanagan, H. and S. Ginoza, "RFC Style Guide", 149 draft-flanagan-style-01, June 2013, 150 . 152 ============ 154 4. IANA Considerations 156 None. 158 5. Security Considerations 160 None. 162 6. Acknowledgements 164 This idea has been kicked around for a few decades by many people. 166 7. Normative References 168 [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 169 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, DOI 10.17487/RFC2026, October 1996, 170 . 172 [RFC7322] Flanagan, H. and S. Ginoza, "RFC Style Guide", RFC 7322, 173 DOI 10.17487/RFC7322, September 2014, 174 . 176 Author's Address 178 Paul Hoffman 179 ICANN 181 Email: paul.hoffman@icann.org