[rfc-i] Informational...

Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com> Tue, 09 June 2020 19:24 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 localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3759E3A0D28; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 12:24:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.451
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.451 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nthpermutation-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i5TCn4yyjGkc; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 12:24:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E53A63A0D26; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 12:24:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE8FDF40750; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 12:23:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3AB7F40750 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 12:23:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nthpermutation-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ujUhKscJ5qjO for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 12:23:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qv1-xf2c.google.com (mail-qv1-xf2c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2c]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D747F4074D for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 12:23:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qv1-xf2c.google.com with SMTP id y9so10674926qvs.4 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Tue, 09 Jun 2020 12:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nthpermutation-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=XSORkld1UX5dQduIONP4BuLyDQYNMk84iDy/zrtlKE8=; b=NUELOKIxCwdlBrJm1U9enLuB2x9mAsGc53o3E4Xv5IuhXyBHC5T6dI/TUa9I68Tbcl oVWuhE20SnX5DAaonpTRvftfnd5BzkJe4SNdgm7250H7rnaNTd2UVr8fzsk1PjaTwluD eVuAJwT5ZZjIAt9NuMDAMxZYHh81Jv5WIz7QWwXPU177mF7dhCnmkjK4LnSuXGoejuQY WNhI+nXgpvXZadvSIQRC37WOi68T33d+jNMBpAvMEhADqoyDEedSoRBATmr9Tb7Xspmi 1y/o2zQTK2IqdxXLQsrrlP2L133PhF40+jRcUnEq1+Na3UgxRlkjx+NNHOs7xF81vrS3 Wb+g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=XSORkld1UX5dQduIONP4BuLyDQYNMk84iDy/zrtlKE8=; b=THQfueKSNVDxlqfdWDJqHMNr5ZrnlL+wga50qO0K6BFgwIJOcuZ6Dw/3mz+fNLhwNd TmXMa+9qTfgtcjxiB6AE3OwJiRG0mMDmQ9YFncjcLbWaetohJbspAvUxJqpVoKpmPccB zoHZ9jHuAnBD2n19VlsMuoqYv5zn/0uBUOa4Wovu+ecTuhmA3tq/BYdRARM0/KMTemVG 9NRqitBr5aKNRSnU43hqywi4u9fyjtZRJr8XZw1qAoNsXTpmk9pqW/blKaLyCcUP9//P dI7ftpmzz9h2i1Fjv4F3vPG12LeS4MYJLQF/Bc3OJfBgc321PMwTFqHDvLfAhJnphqMP LG3g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532lwffElFnIMLLuXfiUdn3Hq4JjNIyEhydQXecs2JUdRpOZ68wl EvHh/CXRtecpH1Tdp3TP28brEPzhVZk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy1kGi5oJxEKOwl9P336mlxxr6D0j/ZyvAChq9LecoyhsbwOXuaUIOfLKHJTq9TpAJ+X/kgow==
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:fd41:: with SMTP id j1mr5763963qvs.107.1591730649074; Tue, 09 Jun 2020 12:24:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.115] (pool-71-163-188-115.washdc.fios.verizon.net. [71.163.188.115]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k17sm12363112qtb.5.2020.06.09.12.24.08 for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Jun 2020 12:24:08 -0700 (PDT)
To: RFC Interest <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
From: Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com>
Message-ID: <021bfdfc-136c-ea07-e2d5-042d9e429522@nthpermutation.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2020 15:24:06 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: [rfc-i] Informational...
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.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 -

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