Re: Comments anyone

[Allison Mankin <[e-mail]>]

Paul requested comments on the draft "All RFCs are not Standards".
Here are some bits of review:

How about changing the title to "Most RFCs are not
Standards," as that has to be more accurate?

The suggested actions are good, as it has long been
difficult for people to find out the current status of
a given RFC on the standards track if it changed since
STD1 came out.  Note too that STD1 has some mismatches with
the Protocol Actions we've taken, for instance, TMUX
should be a Proposed Standard.

On the topic of non-standards track, could the paper
document the practice of having the IESG do technical review and
annotation of informational and experimental rfc submissions?
This is one of the really time-consuming and substantive
aspects of working on the IESG.  We try to have it make
a difference.

How about sending the paper to IEEE Communications or
Spectrum so that a lot of less Internet oriented people read it?

Allison