RE: BCP97bis Mon, 18 October 2021 13:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E8A83A1363 for <>; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 06:05:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t6qUfUmu0z2P for <>; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 06:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D31D3A135B for <>; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 06:05:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from by (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <> for; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 06:00:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Received: from by (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <> (original mail from for; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 05:59:59 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: 'Brian E Carpenter' <>, 'Michael Richardson' <>, "'Joel M. Halpern'" <>, 'IETF' <>
Message-id: <>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 05:49:08 -0700
Subject: RE: BCP97bis
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Sat, 16 Oct 2021 18:20:51 -0700" <00cf01d7c2f5$3a43fff0$aecbffd0$>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <007c01d7c2dc$9090c780$b1b25680$> <> <6454.1634428177@localhost> <> <00cf01d7c2f5$3a43fff0$aecbffd0$>
To: Larry Masinter <>
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 13:05:32 -0000

> This goes into the same mix as "SDO's rethinking business model".
> Surely IEEE would benefit from working citations from IETF to IEEE
> documents, in a form that IEEE commits to stability.


> References to resources that can't be read by IETF reviewers
> should not be accepted -- perhaps there were some cases in the
> past but things have changed.

Speaking as a media type reviewer, I require free access to the relevant
standards before I'll review a media type in the standards tree. This has led
various special arrangements to access specifications that would otherwise cost

Note that this doesn't mean that free access is required for everyone. The
requirements for media types in the standards tree are that there be a  stable,
publicly available specification. Free availability is not part of it.

> References to resources that are available now but you're worried they will
> be moved or exhobitantly paywalled or lost -- keep "if needed" copies.

While I'm not aware of it happening, it's theoretically possible for a
standards organization to fail and take all of its specifications with it,
just like any other organization.

In the case of media types, what constitutes a standards organization able to
register types in the standards tree is up to the IESG to access. In theory
that assessment includes an accessment of the organizations likely stability.


> Just to take "stability of reference" off the table. I read of legal
> documents and judements being subject to this for similar archival goals.

> --