IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Applicability Statements

Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com> Thu, 12 May 2011 18:09 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD5A1E06DD for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 May 2011 11:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xfyhb46CKuMl for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 May 2011 11:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com (wolverine01.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.254]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C358E06C8 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 May 2011 11:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qualcomm.com; i=presnick@qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1305223762; x=1336759762; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc: subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:x-originating-ip; z=Message-ID:=20<4DCC2250.8080603@qualcomm.com>|Date:=20Th u,=2012=20May=202011=2013:09:20=20-0500|From:=20Pete=20Re snick=20<presnick@qualcomm.com>|User-Agent:=20Mozilla/5.0 =20(Macintosh=3B=20U=3B=20Intel=20Mac=20OS=20X=2010.6=3B =20en-US=3B=20rv:1.9.1.9)=20Gecko/20100630=20Eudora/3.0.4 |MIME-Version:=201.0|To:=20Nico=20Williams=20<nico@crypto nector.com>|CC:=20<dcrocker@bbiw.net>,=20Apps=20Discuss =20<apps-discuss@ietf.org>|Subject:=20Re:=20[apps-discuss ]=20Applicability=20Statements|References:=20<4DCAC1CB.30 50905@qualcomm.com>=20<4DCC03FD.3070608@dcrocker.net>=09< BANLkTikU79k4iR+rSYXKsXKzhW1w-EKKbg@mail.gmail.com>=09<4D CC20AF.7060206@qualcomm.com>=20<BANLkTik40NmjddOnEQB1C7R1 JLjbejmo7Q@mail.gmail.com>|In-Reply-To:=20<BANLkTik40Nmjd dOnEQB1C7R1JLjbejmo7Q@mail.gmail.com>|Content-Type:=20tex t/plain=3B=20charset=3D"ISO-8859-1"=3B=20format=3Dflowed |Content-Transfer-Encoding:=207bit|X-Originating-IP:=20[1 72.30.39.5]; bh=N+LXdSOt15Kl+5hu6vqCI7HM7z6Cj4D8b5N+bN9ZUcA=; b=QKuBjiCW0C4nWmSUVPxghF69IU+NPjRtdH6eMOmfbfO0ebMaBU4/fhDw apQp9tCvCVizEEyaVgayvBIUUTX2qqkFd3qL9I0WB0OagVEpC59xa4m6G qRNG0Ls3tY3RYDwRJ7zkgUlbX1zZCrW/Ohp1BCB0YVFVPX5a4YLjMALNG s=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6344"; a="91052605"
Received: from ironmsg04-r.qualcomm.com ([172.30.46.18]) by wolverine01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 12 May 2011 11:09:21 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,358,1301900400"; d="scan'208";a="51978549"
Received: from nasanexhc07.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.39.190]) by Ironmsg04-R.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 12 May 2011 11:09:21 -0700
Received: from resnick2.qualcomm.com (172.30.39.5) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.39.190) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Thu, 12 May 2011 11:09:21 -0700
Message-ID: <4DCC2250.8080603@qualcomm.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 13:09:20 -0500
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100630 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
References: <4DCAC1CB.3050905@qualcomm.com> <4DCC03FD.3070608@dcrocker.net> <BANLkTikU79k4iR+rSYXKsXKzhW1w-EKKbg@mail.gmail.com> <4DCC20AF.7060206@qualcomm.com> <BANLkTik40NmjddOnEQB1C7R1JLjbejmo7Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTik40NmjddOnEQB1C7R1JLjbejmo7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [172.30.39.5]
Cc: dcrocker@bbiw.net, Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Applicability Statements
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 18:09:23 -0000

On 5/12/11 1:05 PM, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Pete Resnick<presnick@qualcomm.com>  wrote:
>    
>>> Are there any RFCs that are ASes?
>>>        
>> There are oodles of RFCs that are ASs. They are all (AFAICT) labeled as
>> BCPs. The experiment is really not introducing ASs per se. The experiment is
>> to put them on the standards track and call them out as 2026 AS documents.
>>      
> Let me rephrase: are there Standards-Track BCPs?  The RFC-Editor RFC
> Search tool does not allow me to search for RFCs that are both, BCPs
> and on the Standards-Track, thus making a search for such a thing
> difficult.
>    

Ah. No, in 2026, BCPs cannot be Standards-Track and Standards-Track 
documents cannot be BCPs. They are mutually exclusive categories.

The problem is that there are some things that we've been making BCPs 
(i.e., AS documents) that I think would be better served by being 
Standards-Track. The experiment is (for future documents of this sort) 
that we try Standards-Track instead of BCP for ASs.

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email