Re: Last Call: <draft-resnick-retire-std1-00.txt> (Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document) to Best Current Practice

[Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>]

On 9/3/13 1:13 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 04/09/2013 04:16, Pete Resnick wrote:
>    
>> On 9/3/13 9:32 AM, Bradner, Scott wrote:
>>      
>>> ...the 3rd paragraph in section 6.1.3...
>>>        
>> Good catch. I'll switch the citation and the quote to the bit from
>> 6.1.3, but I'll also note the removal of the piece in 2.1. I also found
>> a mention in the last paragraph of 3.3. I'll make sure to note in the
>> document that we're removing that too.
>>      

Here's what I've got as a replacement for section 1:

    RFC 2026 [RFC2026] and its predecessors call for the publication of
    an RFC describing the status of IETF protocols:

       The RFC Editor shall publish periodically an "Internet Official
       Protocol Standards" RFC [1], summarizing the status of all
       Internet protocol and service specifications.

    The "Internet Official Protocol Standards" document, now as RFC 5000
    [RFC5000], has always been listed in the Internet Standard series as
    STD 1.  However, the document has not been kept up to date in recent
    years, and it has fallen out of use in favor of the online list
    produced by the RFC Editor [STDS-TRK].  The IETF no longer sees the
    need for the document to be maintained.  Therefore, this document
    updates RFC 2026 [RFC2026], effectively removing the above mentioned
    paragraph from section 6.1.3, along with the paragraph from section
    2.1 that states:

       The status of Internet protocol and service specifications is
       summarized periodically in an RFC entitled "Internet Official
       Protocol Standards" [1].  This RFC shows the level of maturity and
       other helpful information for each Internet protocol or service
       specification (see section 3).

    and the paragraph from section 3.3 that states:

       The "Official Protocol Standards" RFC (STD1) lists a general
       requirement level for each TS, using the nomenclature defined in
       this section.  This RFC is updated periodically.  In many cases,
       more detailed descriptions of the requirement levels of particular
       protocols and of individual features of the protocols will be
       found in appropriate ASs.

    Additionally, this document obsoletes RFC 5000 [RFC5000], the current
    incarnation of that document, and requests that the IESG move that
    document (and therefore STD 1) to Historic status.

Makes me go over 2 pages, but such is life.

>>> and while you are at it - maybe you should remove the 2nd
>>> paragraph in the same section
>>>      An official summary of standards actions completed and pending shall
>>>      appear in each issue of the Internet Society's newsletter.  This
>>>      shall constitute the "publication of record" for Internet standards
>>>      actions.
>>>
>>> should also be removed since that is not being done either
>>> and it is not good to say we have a publication of record that
>>> does not actually exist
>>>        
>> I agree it should probably be removed. Should we replace it anything?
>>      
> Maybe an informational statement that the current standards status is always
> at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcxx00.html ? (Or whatever stable URL
> the RFC Editor prefers to cite.)
>    

I've fixed the reference to [STDS-TRK] so that it shows the URL. I'm not 
sure we need to make further reference to it.

Thinking about this more, we're starting to drift afield of the purpose 
of this document if we start removing that paragraph. Removing that 
paragraph requires a different explanation than the rest. Speaking for 
myself only, I'm leaning against dealing with it. Anyone want to speak 
strongly for or against?

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - [phone]