Hi List, As you may recall, there were opposition against publishing the JSON Canonicalization Scheme as an IETF RFC. Therefore it ended up as RFC 8785 using the ISE track.
Now the authors are facing the same situation with a follow-up specification, JWS/CT: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-jordan-jws-ct-06.html We have been requested to insert a warning sign [*] in the "Abstract" which seems like a rather unusual way of structuring a specification. This text is then to be repeated 3 times more. The argument is that nobody reads the "Status of This Memo" which may be true. Regardless of what you think about this particular work item, I believe the time has come for the IETF to take a FIRM POSITION on how to deal with ISE publications. My proposal is that the IETF either dumps the ISE track altogether or publish such documents under another brand, like ISE-nnnn to avoid the possible confusion between genuine IETF standards and ISE RFCs. What do you think? I have no particular preferences except that all ISE documents should be treated equal. That some ISE publications like RFC 8785 may end-up as de-facto standards is probably what many authors had in mind from the very beginning. Sincerely, Anders Rundgren *] This informational specification has been produced outside the IETF, is not an IETF standard, and does not have IETF consensus. _______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
