Shutdown of lists on May 30th at 12:01 AM
Vince Wolodkin
wolodkin at digitalink.com
Thu May 29 19:19:40 UTC 1997
Dave Crocker wrote:
>
> At 9:32 AM -0700 5/29/97, Karl Denninger wrote:
> >The IAHC was not done within the IETF process. There is no RFC which was
> >promoted to either a BCP or Internet Standard defining their work.
>
> Once again, I do commend to folks that they learn about the IETF
> process. The IETF does not dictate procedures or administration for the
> operational Internet. It does not participate in the development or
> execution of those procedures. The IETF specifies technical standards.
> The documents known as "best current practise" represent efforts to
> characterize methods of using those standards, rather than methods of
> running the Internet.
>
Perhaps you should check RFC2026. It became a BCP right around the same
time that the IAHC started preaching. It seems to indicate that you are
mistaken. Perhaps it is you who should learn about the NEW IETF
process.
5. BEST CURRENT PRACTICE (BCP) RFCs
The BCP subseries of the RFC series is designed to be a way to
standardize practices and the results of community deliberations. A
BCP document is subject to the same basic set of procedures as
standards track documents and thus is a vehicle by which the IETF
community can define and ratify the community's best current thinking
on a statement of principle or on what is believed to be the best way
to perform some operations or IETF process function.
Historically Internet standards have generally been concerned with
the technical specifications for hardware and software required for
computer communication across interconnected networks. However,
since the Internet itself is composed of networks operated by a great
variety of organizations, with diverse goals and rules, good user
service requires that the operators and administrators of the
Internet follow some common guidelines for policies and operations.
While these guidelines are generally different in scope and style
from protocol standards, their establishment needs a similar process
for consensus building.
While it is recognized that entities such as the IAB and IESG are
composed of individuals who may participate, as individuals, in the
technical work of the IETF, it is also recognized that the entities
Bradner Best Current Practice [Page 16]
RFC 2026 Internet Standards Process October 1996
themselves have an existence as leaders in the community. As leaders
in the Internet technical community, these entities should have an
outlet to propose ideas to stimulate work in a particular area, to
raise the community's sensitivity to a certain issue, to make a
statement of architectural principle, or to communicate their
thoughts on other matters. The BCP subseries creates a smoothly
structured way for these management entities to insert proposals into
the consensus-building machinery of the IETF while gauging the
community's view of that issue.
Finally, the BCP series may be used to document the operation of the
IETF itself. For example, this document defines the IETF Standards
Process and is published as a BCP.
Vince WOlodkin
> --------------------
> Dave Crocker +1 408 246 8253
> Brandenburg Consulting fax: +1 408 249 6205
> 675 Spruce Dr. dcrocker at brandenburg.com
> Sunnyvale CA 94086 USA http://www.brandenburg.com
>
> Internet Mail Consortium http://www.imc.org, info at imc.org
More information about the NANOG
mailing list