An RFC is an RFC when it is an RFC (Was: Question Re: best practices)

[Jeroen Massar]

On 2011-May-09 19:00, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> That is a draft, not a real RFC.

Ehmmm, from the top of the document:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6146

8<=============================================
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Request for Comments: 6146
Category: Standards Track
ISSN: 2070-1721
=============================================>8

The fact that it is published as an RFC, it has a number makes it an
RFC. And this RFC is a working group document AND is even Standards
Track and marked as PROPOSED STANDARD.

The draft along with it's 12 iterations are at the top, eg:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-behave-v6v4-xlate-stateful-12

Nothing 'not real' about it, RFC6146 is an RFC, if you like it or not.
When sufficient deployment is there, in (like 4 years ;) then it can
even move to become a Standard, as well, it is standards track.


As it seems you have a problem with the IETF process, I suggest you
raise that on the IETF lists where people can even better put you straight.

The IETF works with a consensus model, the only way to weigh your word
in is to participate in it. The BEHAVE WG is where you want to be at for
this one.

Greets,
 Jeroen