On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, Salz, Rich wrote:
I will start by saying that I am very disappointed in the lack of openness. The
fate of a WG document should be discussed in the official WG channels.
That is what we are doing now?
1) Document status
The proposal would now swap one experiment for another. The first is being
deployed yet the second is newer. I do not think we are doing the Internet any
great service to posit two experiments at the same time, in the same area, with
differences that are apparently not compelling enough to entice the nascent
ecosystem to migrate.
The idea would be that the 6962 experiment is phased out for the 6962bis
experiment. The motivation for not making it a proposed standard, is
that we currently have no implementations and that the changes between
the two documents are not minor. If we don't do this, we could end up
with a Proposed Standard document that is not usable.
We should withdraw this document from any publication stream. What is the
point of publishing it?
The idea is to see implementations, confirm proper functioning and
then (maybe with some minor changes that we learned from running the
experiment) publish this as Proposed Standard.
Note that the IETF currently is also discussing the meaning of these
statuses and how people inside and outside the IETF community see these.
The 6962 document is a good example of how the status of Experimental
does not really reflect deployment (mainline browsers making this
experimental feature mandatory for millions of users)
I don't see anything changing in practise based on changing the status
of this document. Regardless of the status, we will see the existing
experiment continue until a few CT logs with the 6962bis code pop up,
and then when successfull, a gradual move from 6962 log servers to
6962bis log servers.
However, withdrawing the publication would leave 6962 as the only
kind of CT log server, and we would miss all the improvements that
we worked on for years with 6962bis ?
Paul
_______________________________________________
Trans mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
