IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: archives (was The other parts of the report....

Melinda Shore <mshore@cisco.com> Sun, 12 September 2004 22:18 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA16641; Sun, 12 Sep 2004 18:18:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C6cl0-0000wb-1d; Sun, 12 Sep 2004 18:23:42 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C6cb7-0006Kh-HI; Sun, 12 Sep 2004 18:13:25 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C6caC-0005eS-Oc for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 12 Sep 2004 18:12:28 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA15810 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Sep 2004 18:12:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.72] helo=sj-iport-3.cisco.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C6cel-0000mL-1V for ietf@ietf.org; Sun, 12 Sep 2004 18:17:12 -0400
Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (171.71.177.254) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 Sep 2004 15:22:11 +0000
X-BrightmailFiltered: true
Received: from mira-sjc5-c.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-c.cisco.com [171.71.163.17]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i8CMBmpH019303; Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:11:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cisco.com ([10.25.65.178]) by mira-sjc5-c.cisco.com (MOS 3.4.5-GR) with SMTP id AYY02187; Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:11:52 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 18:11:27 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v553)
To: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
From: Melinda Shore <mshore@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4144C796.7020200@isi.edu>
Message-Id: <B0E95E23-0508-11D9-B4E7-000A95E35274@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.553)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: archives (was The other parts of the report....
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6e9349e01d62f32
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Sunday, September 12, 2004, at 06:03 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
> Even the IETF distinguishes between normative refs and non-normative 
> (though it has a penchant for wanting to redefine those words too). 
> Private correspondence is not citable as a normative ref, nor are 
> (currently) IDs.

IDs aren't citable in RFCs at all, so I'm not sure why you brought
that up.  The distinction between normative
references is not that normative references can only be to formal
documents and informative references to more casual documents.  The
distinction is role-based.  Check out 
http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html#policy.refs

> Put them up in a public archive and that assertion is no longer true. 
> It becomes appropriate to use them as normative refs.

Sorry, not true.

Melinda


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email