Please see attached review. I haven't cc'ed the IETF or IESG since my comment is only a process issue, but this can be forwarded as you think fit. If the IESG can see a way round it consistent with RFC 2026, that would be fine by me.
Brian
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this document. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: RFC2818.txt Reviewer: Brian Carpenter Review Date: 2012-06-08 IETF LC End Date: 2012-06-15 IESG Telechat date: Summary: Technically ready but there's a process issue. -------- Comment: -------- The proposed action is to reclassify RFC 2818 (HTTP Over TLS) to Proposed Standard. This seems entirely appropriate from a technical point of view. Process issue: -------------- I am not sure this can be done without a new RFC. Firstly, RFC 2818 carries Informational boilerplate, but more seriously, it was formally updated by RFC 5785. Unfortunately, RFC 5785 does not contain any internal reference to RFC 2818, so it is hard to tell what aspect of RFC 2818 is updated. In any case, that does tell me that something in RFC 2818 is out of date, but as a naive reader, I can't tell what it is. The simplest solution would be a short standards track RFC that cites RFC 2818 as a normative reference (via the existing procedure for such exceptions) and spells out the update caused by RFC 5785. (To be clear, the specific provision of RFC 2026 that leads me to this is in section 6.2: "Change of status shall result in republication of the specification as an RFC, except in the rare case that there have been no changes at all in the specification since the last publication." In this case, RFC 5785 apparently does change the specification in some way, so the exception does not apply.)
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
