On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 4:56 AM Eliot Lear <l...@lear.ch> wrote: > Eric, > On 11.12.2024 13:26, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 12:47 PM Eliot Lear <l...@lear.ch> wrote: > >> And this is where we run into problems, because the moment you change >> that boiler plate, you will devalue the RFC series and create support and >> interoperability problems as people end up implementing different versions >> of a specification. And to be clear, IANA is the LEAST of our problems. >> The IETF needs a way to have not-ready-for-prime-time DRAFT work without >> fear ofcreating a mess. >> > I think this assumes facts not in evidence. > > If you are asking for evidence that we have trained the industry to > believe that drafts are temporary, you should work in or near a commercial > organization who answers RFPs. I've seen my share, and they rarely include > internet-drafts. If you are asking for evidence that this sort of training > would break down, that would be asking for evidence of an event that has > not yet occurred because the boiler plate has largely stated the draft > nature of drafts from the beginning. > Indeed. So we are just left with our respective opinions.
I reiterate: a draft can be stable where a specification is not. > You can reiterate it, but it's only true for a specific meaning of "draft". Draft *versions* are in fact stable, which is why we have been able to do Internet scale deployments based on them. -Ekr
_______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list -- rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to rfc-interest-le...@rfc-editor.org