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

[Mike O'Dell]

one point you are ignoring when it comes to publishing just
anything as an RFC:  once it has that designation "RFC",
THE IDEA IS SANCTIFIED, no matter what disclaimers you
plaster all over it.  (Even a biohazard symbol with a
legend reading "DANGER: LIVE EBOLA" wouldn't help. Ooops -
can't do the symbol in ASCII - sorry - bad idea.)

i know it isn't supposed to be this way, but 

        THIS IS REALITY - GET OVER IT.

the IETF has been in denial about this problem
for many years. I personally submitted an alternative
which was roundly defeated as it had the temerity to
try and bring intent in line with current reality.

instead, people decided to continue insisting that
reality was as they desired, not as it is.

until this get fixed, worrying about any one
incident is worse than pointless - it continues
the denial.

have a nice day.

        -mo

PS - i let the draft in question expire because i wanted to.
that's the nice thing about expiry - the author retains a tiny
modicum of control over something.  the notion that people
other than the author can usurp control and publish it anyway
is repugnant and is plagarism, pure and simple, no matter
whether the author gets listed or not.  you didn't have permission,
it's plagarism, if not theft.