--On Friday, March 14, 2025 11:57 +1300 Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 3. An RFC cannot be in the STD subseries or BCP subseries, and >> Obsolete, as the latter removes it from subseries, even though it >> does not change the Standards Track or Best Current Practice >> category > > That's true if and only if the Obsoleting RFC replaces it in the > numbered series. > > That should be "usually". There are exceptions. In fact some can be > found in a list of all obsoleted normative RFCs that are not marked > Historic that I sent a few months ago. Pulling them out: > > The cases of STD10 and STD11: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/std10 > https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/std11 > > In these cases the STDs were obsoleted by Proposed Standards. There > are certainly others that my script missed. That's a standards > process bug. Those two (at least) have created quite a mess as we've seen people claiming to be following the Standard by complying with RFCs 821 and 822 in the last few yearss. I've tried to get them changed several times, including using them as cases in one of the NEWTRK specs that proposed conforming the STD series to what we were actually doing rather than, e.g., complying with the provisions that, if something is not advanced out of Proposed Standard, it goes away that Pete cited earlier. Went nowhere. The last time I tried, just a few years ago, I was told that was the way it was supposed to work and that "Internet Standard" and STD10 and STD11 would be removed from RFCs 821 and 822 only when the EMAILCORE versions were published. If that is a bug, rather than a bit of well-entrenched silliness, it is a well-fed and carefully nurtured one. Bug or not and contrary to Jay's more recent note (with which, fwiw, I otherwise agree) these are not exceptions but established procedures because the numbers are bound to the status (specifically in the case of STD and Internet Standard). I'd be happy to update and post either draft-klensin-newtrk-std-repurposing (from 2004) or the even earlier draft-klensin-std-numbers (from 2018) if anyone wanted to sponsor them. Either way, those documents (or at least their abstracts) might be helpful reading if this part of the discussion is going to go on much further. john -- rswg mailing list -- rswg@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to rswg-le...@rfc-editor.org
