Re: [saag] SSH & Ntruprime

I think it's been a mistake to allow specification required to be met with
expired drafts.

If the code point is adopted and the draft can no longer change, it's a bit
of an end run on the process. (Citation as something other than work in
progress, because work can no longer progress).

I've started adding guidance to DEs directing them not to accept expired
internet drafts because of this, and to remove entries for expired
drafts... But that only works for new registries moving forward... And to
be clear, I think it's still up to DE to decide if an expired ID is allowed
in a specification required registry.

OS

On Mon, Mar 25, 2024, 8:54 AM Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> wrote:

>
> On 25.03.2024 14:46, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> > [Citation needed].
>
> No.  No citation needed because it happens during the development
> process of a draft all the time, and you should know this because you've
> written enough code to drafts.  The point is, you don't know when a
> draft is "finished".  The benefit of an RFC or something similar is that
> it is a signal that indeed the spec won't change.  We make an exception
> for early allocation for those drafts we know are going to become RFCs.
> Drafts are NOT the droids you're looking for.
>
> Eliot
>
> _______________________________________________
> saag mailing list
> saag@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag
>