Re: [rfc-i] Informational...

Mike,

That sounds good, or, if you want to be more wordy, "any RFC published by
an IETF Working Group that is not a standards-track or Experimental
specification."

Cheers,
Andy

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 1:14 PM Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com>
wrote:

> On 6/9/2020 6:17 PM, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> You left off what's probably the most common category, an IETF WG
> consensus document that doesn't contain protocol conformance language (e.g.
> architecture, framework, overall requirements, etc.), thus is not on the
> standards track.
>
> What - not "Other; Uncategorized"?
>
> Seriously though - I agree.   I'm wondering if there might be 2-4
> categories we could agree on to break these down.  Or maybe just one?
>
> Working Group Explanatory Material?
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Andy
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 3:24 PM Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi -
>>
>> I was looking at a document that's currently on last call for the third
>> time in the transport area with a proposed status of "Informational".
>> After reading it, I was wondering why it was being published by the
>> Transport area, as opposed to being an architectural discussion by the
>> IAB or even as a product of the IRTF?  In any event, it got me thinking
>> about the Informational category of documents and wondering what would
>> happen if we added a sub-header or sub-category for documents published
>> under this banner - here's a strawman list:
>>
>> IAB Architectural Note - applied to IAB consensus documents
>> IAB Policy Note -  ditto
>> IESG Policy Note - applied to IESG consensus documents
>> Community Policy Note - applied to community consensus documents
>> wherever originated
>> Technical Cross Publication - previously published documents where the
>> IETF will not gain change control
>> IRTF Pure Research
>> IRTF Applied Research
>> IETF Path Not Taken (applied to documents that weren't accepted as WG
>> items, but might have been  viable alternatives ISE or Area Director
>> sponsored)
>> Individual Technical Proposal or Opinion
>> Individual Policy Proposal or Opinion
>> Individual Architectural Proposal or Opinion
>> Individual Other
>> (IAB/IESG/IRTF/IETF) Workshop Report
>> Business Report
>> Other; Uncategorized.
>>
>> The Informational group is the least homogeneous of any of the
>> publication categories, and possible the one least understood by the
>> non-IETF crowd as to its role.  Perhaps providing some sub-text might
>> improve things slightly.
>>
>> This is a discussion topic - not so much a baked proposal.
>>
>> Enjoy - Mike
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rfc-interest mailing list
>> rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>>
>
>