On Sun 03/Nov/2024 04:22:39 +0100 Steven M Jones wrote:
I've been looking for documented requirements around whether a Proposed
Standard can reference an Experimental document. I reviewed RFC 2026 and tried
to scan the 15 RFCs that update it that seemed relevant (e.g. I skipped the IPR
ones).
For example, RFC 2026 Section 2.2 describes how an I-D has no formal status,
but if it's expected to be published on the standards track it may be
referenced as a "Work in Progress" in a standards track document.
I found requirements for Applicability Statements in RFC 2026 Section 3.2 where
the AS could not have a higher maturity level than any standards track
Technical Specification it references. So, a Draft Standard AS cannot reference
a Proposed Standard TS.
But I couldn't find such a prohibition for a Proposed Standard referencing an
Experimental document. I probably just failed with my search terms and
skimming... Maybe there's text that says it can't reference anything but
standards track documents, which I missed?
If such a restriction existed it would only be about normative references. And
we don't want to cite ARC as normative at this stage, methinks.
ARC is mentioned at the end of Section 7.4, so it can as well be referenced.
(I already proposed a possible way to extend that paragraph. Let me copy it
here as a footer.)
Best
Ale
--
NEW:
However, as of
this writing, use of [ARC] is nascent, as is industry experience with
it in connection with DMARC. Pinpointing ARC's trust problem and/or
introducing methods to reliably reverse MLM transformations can bring
to an environment where the limitations highlighted in this section
fade away. Yet we publish this document with those limitations as a
first step in that direction.
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
