[saag] Re: New Version Notification for draft-rsalz-crypto-registries-00.txt

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 6:08 PM Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>
> Hiya,
>
> In a cogent description of some issues from one POV, ekr concluded:
>
> On 30/11/2024 01:36, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> > Obviously, YMMV, but I think in that case the arguments you are
> > offering for why said document needs to be permanent and immutable
> > (leaving aside that I don't really agree with your characterization
> > of the properties of I-Ds and GitHub) are quite a bit weaker
>
> FWIW, I disagree with your conclusion above. ISTM there is often
> (not always, but often) benefit to the Internet community if the
> ways in which (esp. more important) things work are documented
> more lastingly. Vellum seems like overkill, esp. for the donor;-),
> But RFCs seem like quite a good point on the ephemeral v. lasting
> spectrum in many cases, even if we (the IETF/some WG) are not in
> a mood to make changes to the spec.
>
> It'd be good if we could at some point try crisply characterise
> this set of disagreements about the RFC series. I think there are
> a small number of different valid positions here and we seem to
> have a non-trivial set of long-time IETF participants espousing
> each such position, so understanding (rather than trying to fix)
> those disagreements could be useful.
>

Well, it's possible this is about the RFC series, but I'm not yet sure,
because there are two kinds of RFCs one could imagine here:

1. IETF Stream RFCs
2. Independent Stream RFCs

Which do you have in mind?

-Ekr