Re: [Rfcplusplus] problems and solutions

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 20/06/2018 10:47, Doug Royer wrote:
> On 06/19/2018 12:07 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> (Just joined the list, sorry about the new thread.)
>> ...
>> As to solutions, Andrew Malis proposed some clearer boilerplate text at
>> the top of each document. Some years ago, we added text like this to
>> specs in the XMPP Standards Foundation's XEP series, and it helped to
>> educate people who were confused about document status. [1]
>>
> 
> Published RFCs can not be edited, so, any "Final Standard" in the 
> document text will be obsolete at some point. Is this just not kicking 
> the can down the road a few more years?
> 
> Would it be a better solution to log them with something like an IANA 
> registration? Perhaps grouped by area and protocol.
> 
> Documents intended to be standard would then just refer the reader to 
> the standard registration page that would point to the latest hopeful 
> document(s).

We don't need to wake up IANA for this. We already have the STD designation,
which for some reason we've never chosen to use for the PS documents that
the Internet runs on. A proposal for this was made 14 years ago:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-klensin-newtrk-std-repurposing
and not much has changed since then.

   Brian