On Tue, Jul 7, 2026 at 9:38 AM Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) <[email protected]> wrote:
> The discussion on which tag applies would be at least based on something > written and consensus based and not just on differing strong opinions about > how to do it right. That should make the discussion easier and also create > less of them. That’s the goal! Maybe it wouldn’t avoid it entirely but I > don’t think that a good reason to not do it as I don’t think there is a > perfect solution (and probably there don’t need to be one; sometimes you > simply need to have a discussion and make a decision). > I'm sorry, I don't agree. My view is that adding more tags with detailed guidelines is just as likely to create more debate, not less. If we are to do something here, I would instead replace both Obsoletes and Updates with some variant of "look over here" or "you might be interested in", thus avoiding any debate. > Having some potentially confusing tags on old RFCs (that could be revised > if needed) doesn’t seem to be worse than what we have right now: one tag > that is not defined at all and a mismatch of use and interpretation as > everybody makes up their own requirements. > I think we just have different opinions. -Ekr > On 7. Jul 2026, at 17:02, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 7, 2026 at 7:54 AM Michael Richardson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> Mirja Kuehlewind \(IETF\) <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Agreed! >> I think that it would be brilliant if an AD review told the WG: >> "Yeah, that document is not an Updates-123, it's an Updates-545, right?" >> >> WG: Oh yeah, we didn't change our meta-data as our I-D evolved into being >> better at interoperating with old thing FOO. >> > > This seems like the optimistic view. The pessimistic view is that it will > usher > in a whole new round of arguments about whether it should be Updates-123 or > Updates-545. > > >> >> > Also my question is what’s the harm I trying it. If it doesn’t >> help, we >> > stop it again. However, I think there is a chance to at least >> improve >> > the situation even though we might not fix all issues entirely. >> >> +1 >> > > In addition to the concern above, namely creating new arguments about > which tag applies, if it turns out not to work, we end up with a bunch of > confusing and no-longer-used tags in perpetuity. > > -Ekr > > > >
-- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
