[AFS3-std] Submitting a draft RFC as Experimental

[Derrick Brashear]

Fine. I will submit draft 8 shortly then (after the registrar
considerations are complete)

On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu> wrote:
> --On Tuesday, February 01, 2011 12:00:05 PM -0500 Derrick Brashear
> <shadow@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> I don't believe this document has ever been submitted to the RFC-Editor=
.
>>> =A0I don't think it should be until we actually consider it a "standard=
".
>>> =A0IIRC, part of the goal was to minimize the burden we place on the
>>> RFC-Editor.
>>
>> I assume we do now consider it ratified, and thus it should be
>> submitted. Should I do
>> so now, and what should the status be? Currently the document (with
>> the ratified text
>> explaining implicit and explicit added) is marked to be draft-08, but
>> I don't know what the
>> next step should be.
>
> The way I read Simon's document, we have three states:
>
> - Documents start out in "draft" state, which means they are still
> =A0under development; this includes both documents representing
> =A0proposals from individual participants and documents the group
> =A0is working on (really, the line there is fuzzy at best; we have
> =A0no formal "adoption" step and IMHO don't need one).
>
> =A0This has nothing to do with being an internet-draft, which is
> =A0about having a particular format and being archived and
> =A0distributed in a particular way. =A0It also has nothing to do
> =A0with the IETF's "Draft Standard" status, which is a step on
> =A0the way to becoming an Internet standard.
>
> - When the group has formed a consensus that a document is done and
> =A0should eventually become a standard, its status is changed to
> =A0"experimental", reflecting the fact that we don't want to call
> =A0something finished that in fact has never been implemented or
> =A0tested. =A0Again, this has nothing to do with the "Experimental"
> =A0status attached to RFC's, which generally denotes a document
> =A0that actually describes an experiment, or at least a protocol
> =A0that is the subject of experimentation.
>
> - Once a protocol has been fully implemented, tested, and we are
> =A0satisfied that it is sufficiently mature, its status is changed
> =A0to "standard". =A0This, again, is distinct from the IETF's
> =A0"Standard" -- we don't get to define Internet standards.
>
>
> Again according to Simon's document, standard" documents are submitted as
> RFC's (with status "Informational"); "draft" and "experimental" documents
> are distributed as internet-drafts. =A0This is because an "experimental"
> document is by definition not mature, and may be expected to change as a
> result of problems found during implementation and testing. =A0The proces=
s of
> publishing an RFC takes a while and is a substantial amount of work for t=
he
> RFC Production Center. =A0We want to limit the amount of load we create.
>
> -- Jeff
>



--=20
Derrick