Re: [netmod] Alissa Cooper's Abstain on draft-ietf-netmod-artwork-folding-09: (with COMMENT)

On Wed, 2019-09-04 at 11:56 -0700, Alissa Cooper via Datatracker wrote:
> Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-netmod-artwork-folding-09: Abstain
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-artwork-folding/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> RFC 7994 is not a product of IETF consensus, so it seems inappropriate to
> publish a consensus BCP predicated on requirements defined in RFC 7994 which
> themselves do not have IETF consensus. This would be the only document related
> to the RFC format in the last 10 years that I'm aware of that would be
> published on the IETF stream.
> 
> There has been discussion about how embedding YANG models in RFCs seems like a
> poor fit for a number of reasons. By standardizing line-folding mechanisms and
> claiming them as a best practice, this document reinforces the root of that
> problem rather than trying to fix it.

Well said, I agree with Alissa's conclusion.

Lada

> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
-- 
Ladislav Lhotka
Head, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67