Dave Crocker wrote:
At 12:19 PM -0700 5/29/97, Vince Wolodkin wrote:
Perhaps you should check RFC2026. It became a BCP right around the same
Indeed. Now, perhaps, your lengthy quoting of the standards document seems to you to provide patently obvious indication that BCPs pertain to administration and operation of the running Internet. It doesn't.
To the extent that you feel otherwise, please quote that text specifically. To the extent that you think that "standardize practices and the results of community deliberations" is that meaningful statement, you need to try harder, since such language has always been used and it has never covered what you now want to claim.
Sorry, I didn't mean to overload your circuits. Paragraph 2 of my quoting is the relevant part, specifically sentences 2 and 3. To quote "good user service requires that the operators and administrators of the Internet follow some common guidelines for policies and operations. While these guidelines are generally different in scope and style from protocol standards, their establishment needs a similar process for consensus building"
In any even, the IETF has shown no interest in covering this topic. To the extent you think otherwise, you need to document the claim.
I think I just did.
mistaken. Perhaps it is you who should learn about the NEW IETF process.
Vince, nice to see you keep this on a high level of reasoned debate.
Just returning your volley. It is you who continually recommend that others "learn the process", I thought it only fair to indicate that even you might need to learn a few things. I don't think anyone can be expected to stay on top of all the syntactic nuances of every RFC, so I promise to stop if you will.
Thank you for playing.
Always a pleasure.
d/
-------------------- Dave Crocker
Vince Wolodkin