RE: Standard Track dependencies on Informational RFCs

[Christian Huitema]

> > Normative references to stable non-standards track documents
> > are indeed allowed when those documents are of the nature of
> > algorithm descriptions, mathematical theorems, and the like -
> 
> there is no such topic-based dispensation in 2026 - the 
> section that Brian
> referres to needs to be read in conjunction with sec 4.2.4 pp 2
> 
> there is little issue with referring to standards from elsewhere
> (see sec 7) even if the standard is published as an info rfc but
> just because somone says that a info RFC has a particular type of 
> content does not mean that it gets any special treatment
> 
> this is not to say that we do not need to figure out how to
> deal with this type of case but I do not agree that Brian's 
> way is legit

Well, there may be a problem with the actual text in 2026, but there is
certainly not a problem with the intent behind our rules. The main problem
about references is that they be stable, i.e. they cannot be changed from
under us, and that they be widely available, preferably for free. An
informational RFC certainly meets these requirements.