idnits 2.17.1 draft-roach-id-cite-00.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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. 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 contain a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, and may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. The disclaimer is necessary when there are original authors that you have been unable to contact, or if some do not wish to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust. If you are able to get all authors (current and original) to grant those rights, you can and should remove the disclaimer; otherwise, the disclaimer is needed and you can ignore this comment. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (April 06, 2018) is 2183 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Best Current Practice ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) No issues found here. Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group A. Roach 3 Internet-Draft Mozilla 4 Updates: 2026 (if approved) April 06, 2018 5 Intended status: Best Current Practice 6 Expires: October 8, 2018 8 Referring to Internet Drafts as 'Internet Drafts' Rather Than 'Works in 9 Progress' 10 draft-roach-id-cite-00 12 Abstract 14 This document updates RFC 2026 to change the term "Work in Progress" 15 to "Internet Draft." 17 Status of This Memo 19 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 20 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 22 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 23 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 24 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 25 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 27 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 28 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 29 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 30 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 32 This Internet-Draft will expire on October 8, 2018. 34 Copyright Notice 36 Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 37 document authors. All rights reserved. 39 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 40 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 41 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 42 publication of this document. Please review these documents 43 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 44 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 45 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 46 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 47 described in the Simplified BSD License. 49 This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF 50 Contributions published or made publicly available before November 51 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this 52 material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow 53 modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. 54 Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling 55 the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified 56 outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may 57 not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format 58 it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other 59 than English. 61 Table of Contents 63 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 64 2. Change to RFC 2026 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 65 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 66 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 67 5. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 68 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 70 1. Introduction 72 Section 2.2. of [RFC2026] allows publication of RFC with references 73 to Internet-Drafts, with the requirement that such citations indicate 74 that the Internet-Draft is labeled as a "Work in Progress." While 75 this designation is frequently accurate when used in this way, it is 76 sometimes useful for RFCs to refer to Internet Drafts that are not 77 being actively maintained and which will likely never be published. 78 As such documents are not technically "Works in Progress," this 79 specification updates RFC 2026's language to use the more broadly 80 applicable phrase "Internet Draft." 82 2. Change to RFC 2026 84 This document updates RFC 2026 by replacing the final paragraph of 85 its section 2.2 with the following text: 87 Note: It is acceptable to reference a standards-track specification 88 that may reasonably be expected to be published as an RFC using the 89 phrase "Internet Draft" without referencing an Internet-Draft. This 90 may also be done in a standards track document itself as long as the 91 specification in which the reference is made would stand as a 92 complete and understandable document with or without the reference to 93 the "Internet Draft". 95 3. Security Considerations 97 This change is administrative, and should have no significant impact 98 on security. 100 4. IANA Considerations 102 This document requires no actions from IANA. 104 5. Normative References 106 [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 107 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, DOI 10.17487/RFC2026, October 1996, 108 . 110 Author's Address 112 Adam Roach 113 Mozilla 114 \ 115 Dallas 116 US 118 Phone: +1 650 903 0800 x863 119 Email: adam@nostrum.com