IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] More about RFC10k

Jean Mahoney <jmahoney@amsl.com> Tue, 03 May 2022 22:28 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E6EAC15E6CA for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2022 15:28:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1651616888; bh=3SbBLfvEAjdPb3AJ93vQWb9rQZR/p1PG33Ar4mC4NPo=; h=Date:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe; b=SnRwOohJGtUPXeyjCO8+5WHf/5A7OdxoI5iZU3ZEctKOjXzX8oh6iOJASBvZf5zHK WVKEHWblbiWGbJGtwVHMIuPKogsCMKf0gqpU16e+tFkBuMhVPaBIDwtHnILcKCcRoL XFnRHHq7GNCLDlxGbG/GefJnf0ku0fCrDjSomaMM=
X-Mailbox-Line: From rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org Tue May 3 15:28:08 2022
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE529C1594B0; Tue, 3 May 2022 15:28:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1651616887; bh=3SbBLfvEAjdPb3AJ93vQWb9rQZR/p1PG33Ar4mC4NPo=; h=Date:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe; b=BGxPDlpescVn5MbVTY2/3vlAJRR+3NcEQC8piD/zR2ZLhlKFRv2Do5NfpaOnakctn BY9FzVswNHXFnegFQui3Axx3R9QnazahuD86wInDif73a1IjsHhrD/mwd71Bwdi+8f 2euzP8EYFkJsglR2ZhdKS1nLEj2Vqjqt+3esvaHA=
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBF77C1594B0 for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2022 15:28:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.755
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.755 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.857, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qEYTrx8hMeOt for <rfc-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 May 2022 15:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c8a.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B53B6C14F744 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 3 May 2022 15:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BA0D425C195; Tue, 3 May 2022 15:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from c8a.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (c8a.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y6xjYUjMY2RA; Tue, 3 May 2022 15:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.203] (unknown [47.186.48.51]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 70523425A344; Tue, 3 May 2022 15:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <a3f64d92-8959-5981-0189-3213f1cbe3b2@amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 03 May 2022 17:28:01 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: "HANSEN, TONY L" <tony@att.com>, RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
References: <57032722.7000201@gmail.com> <56566E61-A604-4618-A05B-9172DF83610F@att.com> <DB53E3B0-5E93-4D46-9800-F20059569F54@tzi.org> <DE653048-A65D-4335-8A4A-DF76ABC272E8@tzi.org> <B8729110-E15C-4444-ADD2-3C77C12F5DE5@att.com>
From: Jean Mahoney <jmahoney@amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <B8729110-E15C-4444-ADD2-3C77C12F5DE5@att.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfc-interest/3QkZkdm9GscjZe6TZ-6lpTkv9Hg>
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] More about RFC10k
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

Hi all,

Annual stats can be found here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcs-per-year/

Note that in 2020 there were 209 RFCs published. Recalculating the 
average going back five years [1] and using the (fairly close) estimate 
that 750 numbers have not yet been assigned, RFC 10K could happen in 
about 3.4 years.

Best regards,

Jean

[1]  Five years is an arbitrary cutoff for the average and gives the 
following: (263+208+180+209+240)/5 = ~220/year.

On 4/28/22 6:50 PM, HANSEN, TONY L wrote:
> Ack. When I wrote the message from 2015 that Carsten replied to, we were averaging >300 RFCs per year. However, the last four years have slowed down drastically:
>
> 278 RFCs in 2000.
> 193 RFCs in 2001.
> 219 RFCs in 2002.
> 234 RFCs in 2003.
> 281 RFCs in 2004.
> 327 RFCs in 2005.
> 459 RFCs in 2006.
> 320 RFCs in 2007.
> 289 RFCs in 2008.
> 285 RFCs in 2009.
> 364 RFCs in 2010.
> 390 RFCs in 2011.
> 337 RFCs in 2012.
> 276 RFCs in 2013.
> 326 RFCs in 2014.
> 300 RFCs in 2015.
> 310 RFCs in 2016.
> 263 RFCs in 2017.
> 209 RFCs in 2018.
> 179 RFCs in 2019.
> 127 RFCs in 2020.
>
> Jari's page doesn't have 2021 in it, but rfc index indicates that there were 240.
>
> Since the highest number is currently 9236, that leaves us ~750 to go. If we continue at the average of the past three years (179+127+240)/3 = ~180/year, that gives us about another four years before we hit 10k, or sometime in or after 2025.
>
> 	Tony
>
> On 4/28/2022, 6:45 PM, "rfc-interest on behalf of Carsten Bormann" <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org on behalf of cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
>
>      On 2022-04-29, at 00:38, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
>      >
>      > Does anyone have a recent projection for when RFC10K is going to hit?
>
>      (An update of https://arkko.com/tools/rfcstats/pubdistr.html would be a nice shortcut to an estimate.)
>
>      Grüße, Carsten
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
> https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email