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

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

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.

Cheers,
S.