[AFS3-std] Re: IBM will not re-license OpenAFS .xg files

[Jeffrey Hutzelman]

On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 17:05 -0400, Jeffrey Altman wrote:

> Once a document has reached consensus the document is final and declared
> to be an "AFS3 Experimental Standard".  At this point any RPC signatures
> and code point assignments are frozen because implementers are now
> permitted to write code and deploy it.

I realized I forgot to say something on this point.  Whether a new code
point is required is going to depend on how broken/unimplementable the
original spec is and whether anyone has even tried.  However, given the
size of most of the namespaces involved, I think we should generally err
on the side of allocating new numbers, even if the old ones will end up
never being implemented.

> However, once a document is forwarded to the RFC Editor as this document
> was, it is supposed to be an "AFS3 Standard".  If this is not clear,
> then the bylaws for this group will need to be changed.  Of course, they
> need to be changed in any case.

Well, this is backwards.  Submitting a document to RFC-Editor doesn't
advance it to standard; rather, a document should be published that way
only once it becomes a standard.  AFAIK, this one never did, and
certainly not before it was sent to the ISE.


We do need a revised charter.  That was actually supposed to be one of
the group's first tasks, but as it turns out, I think we're better off
having waited.  If there really is renewed interest, perhaps we can get
a few documents done and then discuss a charter update.  In the
meantime, we can always adopt process changes simply by consensus of
this group.


-- Jeff