Re: [EAI] State of the core documents

[Frank Ellermann <[e-mail]>]

On 24 October 2011 21:22, John C Klensin wrote:

> (2) We failed to say explicitly that the new
> documents should cause the experimental ones to
> be reclassified as Historic.

The IESG ION^D^D^Dhow-to is very new; no one could
foresee that "obsoletes" is not more good enough.
If a PS obsoletes an experiment I'd consider the
experiment as implicitly finished.  If that SHOULD
be now done explicitly it's also fine, but in that
case I'd also like to see this SHOULD in an RFC,
not only in a "how-to".   As it happens I stumbled
over the link in a "daily dose" just this morning,
but missed that it's related to the EAI Last Call.

> given the nature of the experimental specs and the
> care we have taken to make sure that implementations
> of them cannot interfere with the final versions, it
> really doesn't make a lot of difference, at least
> IMO.

If "historic" offers you the opportunity to recycle
the term UTF8SMTP instead of UTF8SMTPBIS I'd like it.

> I'm quite sure that, if they start editing, they
> will find the references and everything will go into
> "Missref hold".  That, from my point of view, would
> be a disaster.

Maybe you could replace the "missrefs" by vague words
in AUTH84, e.g., instead of "<I-D.POP-EAI>" how about
"a successor of <RFC.POP.EAI.experimental>"?

> We reopen 4952bis to eliminate the normative
> dependences on documents that aren't finished (or
> written), clean up the change descriptions a bit,
> and update references before someone whines about
> those.

That sounds slightly more convoluted than my idea...

What's wrong with the (approved) status of 4952bis,
why do you think it needs to be on standards track?

Just in case, I'm not against a status change, but I
don't see the purpose yet, it sounds like more work
than necessary.  (((If I could pick a -bis where you
spend your time it would start with 5..., not 4...)))

> And, please, in the interest of WG progress, please
> do not use this as an excuse to revisit old issues:

Apropos, I liked the "duck or grouse" in the shepherd
summary.  And (ab)used it as an excuse for posting no
additional comment about said "old issues" in the LC.

-Frank