How about having a running list (or registry) of IETF RFCs that have become the "de-facto" standards?
Best regards, Kathleen -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Carsten Bormann Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 3:33 PM To: Michael Richardson Cc: Sam Hartman; IETF list Subject: Re: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process On May 1, 2013, at 20:11, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: > It's what PS *ought* to have been, and what "RFC"s were prior to > 1990 or so. One problem is certainly the cognitive barrier imposed by the RFC process. -- RFCs never change, so you want to get them right; -- there is a two-month editorial process in front of the publication; etc. etc. So I don't think changing the process leading up to the RFCs is really going to change that much. Having a label for a "baked" I-D, maybe some publicly visible directory for them, but retaining the I-D's fast change capability for editorial changes (and fixes that turn out to be necessary), would work better. I also like what Sam said: Try this out first as an informal addendum to what we have and what works. Grüße, Carsten
