Roger Price
2022-Jul-26 07:58 UTC
[Nut-upsuser] The IETF wants to remove chapter 8 "Implementation Status"
The Internet Draft has progressed to the final stage known as AUTH48. The technical contents are ok, and the reviewers are working on my british spelling, lack of commas and other sins. The document is now known as an RFC-to-be. Among the reviewers' comments is the following: 8) <!--[rfced] Per the suggestion of RFC 7942 ("Improving Awareness of Running Code: The Implementation Status Section"), may we remove the Implementation Status section of this document? --> Background: RFC 2026 explains that RFC publications are either "Standards Track", with its three maturity levels: "Proposed Standard", "Draft Standard", and "Standard", or off-track with one of three "off-track" maturity levels: "Experimental", "Informational", or "Historic". https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2026 Most IETF texts are prepared by official IETF working groups and are intended for Standards Track status. Our text is one of the few Independent Submissions, written by an individual and not a working group. It cannot be "Standards Track". However the AUTH48 editors examining our text want to apply RFC 7942 "Improving Awareness of Running Code: The Implementation Status Section" which removes the Implementation Status section from Standards Track RFCs. Even though RFC 7942 says clearly "I-Ds published on the Independent Stream are explicitly out of scope.", we are being treated as standards material. Whilst this is flattering, it would mean removing the detailed 20+ year history, and the Recommended Minimum support. I propose: 1) Removing the section 8 "Implementation Status" 2) Moving subsections 8.2, 8.2.1, 8.2.2, 8.2.3 "Recommended Minimum Support" to Appendix A, new section A.4. If anyone wishes to comment on this change, I am listening. I don't have to reply to the IETF editors immediately. Roger _______________________________________________________________________________ A NUT IETF Standard? In the long term a future Standards Track text for NUT could be developed within the netconf Working Group which is part of the IETF Operations and Management Area (ops). https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/netconf/about/ I hear that this has already been whispered, but there is no hurry, and I am not volunteering for the job. R.