Re: Topic drift Re: An Internet Draft as reference material

[Grenville Armitage]

Keith Moore wrote:
        [..]
> It just means
> that IETF is removing the most widely known and most authoritative
> source of an I-D after six months.

I think that was my point.

        [..]

> IETF's current policy makes the I-D series more valuable than it would
> be if either I-Ds did not expire at all, or if they somehow disappeared
> from existence.

We clearly differ. This thread isn't about whether IETF's policy
makes I-Ds more or less valuable. It started with the circumstances
under which citation of I-Ds is warranted (there are some), and
moved to whether longevity of I-D archives would be a good thing
for IPR searches (it would be). Arguing that anyone can stop such
archiving - especially since the IETF has been doing it indirectly
with CD-ROM proceedings - is what I'm finding pointless about this
entire thread now. Asserting that somehow somehow any of this will
make I-D citations any more or less prevalent is naieve.

cheers,
gja