Subject: [newtrk] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-newtrk-promotion-00.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:50:01 -0500

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the New IETF Standards Track Discussion Working Group of the IETF.

	Title		: Cleaning the Attic II: Promoting Marketplace-approved Standards

	Author(s)	: J. Klensin, S. Dawkins
	Filename	: draft-ietf-newtrk-promotion-00.txt
	Pages		: 11
	Date		: 2006-2-23
	
Historically, Internet Standards have been characterized by three
primary criteria: the specifications are stable, implementations of
them have been demonstrated to be interoperable, and they have
achieved sufficient deployment to be considered useful.  The IETF has
developed specific rules for determining whether those criteria have
been met, but the rules and their implementation have sometimes not
adequately reflected those underlying criteria.  The result has been
that the application of the rules has not resulted in STDs for all
protocols that meet the underlying criteria.  This document proposes
a process experiment to reclassify standards-track documents whose
interoperability and utility have been demonstrated by the fact of
deployment and use in products being used by Internet users.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-newtrk-promotion-00.txt

To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to 
[email-masked] with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.  
You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce 
to change your subscription settings.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-ietf-newtrk-promotion-00.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:
	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-newtrk-promotion-00.txt".
	
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 11:48:20 +0100

These are personal comments only.

At the top level, I believe this is the wrong solution to
the right problem. I already proposed what I believe is the
right solution in draft-carpenter-newtrk-twostep. I'm sure
your local time machine will find this expired draft easily,
but its main point was to combine DS and Standard into
a single grade called Interoperable Standard, thereby
avoiding makework.

Now some direct comments on the current draft.

> 3.  Definition of the Alternate Approval Path
> 
>    Any member (or group of members) of the IETF community (identified as
>    "the proposer" below) may propose that a protocol specification be
>    reclassified as an Internet Standard if the following minimum
>    criteria are met.
> 
>    1.  The RFC documenting the specification, or the last-published RFC
>        if there are more than one, was published at least three years
>        earlier.

This doesn't make it clear what classes of RFC are to be considered.
I assume the main target is older PS and DS documents? But the text
is wider. Surely some definitely need to be excluded - Historic, any
Informational with a proprietary name in its title, anything Obsoleted,
and anything Updated unless the update also qualifies.

...
>    Once an enabling document is generated, it will be submitted to the
>    IAD.  The IESG will initiate a review process as described below.

Not the IAD. The IAD has no function in the standards process. Maybe this
means the IESG Secretary?

> 3.2.1.  Last Call Procedure
> 
>    As mentioned above, there is no pre-Last Call AD or IESG review of
>    enabling documents.  When an enabling document is ready, and has been
>    posted as an I-D, the proposer may request that an IETF Last Call be
>    initiated by request to the IESG Secretary or other individual
>    designated by the IESG and announced to the community.  The person
>    receiving the enabling document will cause the completeness of the
>    enabling document to be checked and will verify that the three-year
>    requirement has been met, then the Secretariat will issue the IETF
>    Last Call.

This pre-last call check is a "faculty" job and not clerical. I don't
see how it can be done other than by an AD or by the equivalent of a
PROTO shepherd.

> 4.1.  IESG Workload
> 
>    To the extent to which this experiment encourages efforts to advance
>    documents that otherwise would continue to rest in the purgatory of
>    resting indefinitely in Proposed (or even Draft) Standard while RFC
>    2026 insists that they be re-identified as historic and abandoned,

Her's my problem. Why invent a whole new process instead of simply
fixing that problem at source by fixing 2026?

> 6.2.  Informative References
> 
>    [decruft]  Lear, E. and H. Alvestrand, "Getting rid of the cruft:
>               Report from an experiment in identifying and reclassifying
>               obsolete standards documents",
>               draft-ietf-newtrk-decruft-experiment-03 (work in
>               progress), January 2006.
> 
>               This document has been approved as a BCP and is awaiting
>               publication.

Nit: it's Informational. (The IESG logged a decision to declassify the
obsolete documents.)

     Brian

.
newtrk resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html