Fwd: Protocol Action: 'Moving mailserver: URI scheme to historic' to Proposed Standard (draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic-00.txt)

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Fwd: Protocol Action: 'Moving mailserver: URI scheme to historic' to Proposed Standard (draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic-00.txt)

Martin J. Dürst
Now that I see it right in front of my eyes, I'm quite a bit surprised
that this document is going to be a Proposed Standard. Was this
discussed before? Is there a plan to advance it to Draft Standard and
then Full Standard? Wouldn't Informational be good enough? Can this
still be fixed?

[If this was already discussed, please ignore this message.]

Regards,   Martin.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Moving mailserver: URI scheme to historic'
to Proposed Standard (draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic-00.txt)
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:49:48 -0800
From: The IESG <[hidden email]>
To: IETF-Announce <[hidden email]>
CC: Internet Architecture Board <[hidden email]>,        RFC Editor
<[hidden email]>

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Moving mailserver: URI scheme to historic'
   (draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic-00.txt) as a Proposed
Standard

This document has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an
IETF Working Group.

The IESG contact person is Peter Saint-Andre.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic/



Technical Summary

    This document registers the mailserver: URI scheme as
    historic in the IANA URI registry.

Working Group Summary

    This document is not the product of a working group.

Document Quality

    The document cleans out some cruft in the IANA registry
    and clarifies possible confusion regarding the mailserver:
    URI scheme, which was never put into use.  This topic was
    discussed on the URI and Applications Area email lists, and
    there was wide agreement that this document is helpful.

Personnel

    The Document Shepherd / Responsible Area Director is
    Peter Saint-Andre.

RFC Editor Note

    Please add the following line to the document header:

       Updates: RFC 1738

_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Protocol Action: 'Moving mailserver: URI scheme to historic' to Proposed Standard (draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic-00.txt)

Mykyta Yevstifeyev
11.01.2011 2:26, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote:

Dear Martin,

Please see
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/maillist.html 
where you can find some discussion on this topic.

As for the category, I really wonder how may the author claim that there
are 2 independent implementations of such technology, per RFC2026 to
move it to Draft Standard?

Mykyta

> Now that I see it right in front of my eyes, I'm quite a bit surprised
> that this document is going to be a Proposed Standard. Was this
> discussed before? Is there a plan to advance it to Draft Standard and
> then Full Standard? Wouldn't Informational be good enough? Can this
> still be fixed?
>
> [If this was already discussed, please ignore this message.]
>
> Regards,   Martin.
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Protocol Action: 'Moving mailserver: URI scheme to historic'
> to    Proposed Standard
> (draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic-00.txt)
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:49:48 -0800
> From: The IESG <[hidden email]>
> To: IETF-Announce <[hidden email]>
> CC: Internet Architecture Board <[hidden email]>,        RFC Editor
> <[hidden email]>
>
> The IESG has approved the following document:
> - 'Moving mailserver: URI scheme to historic'
>   (draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic-00.txt) as a Proposed
> Standard
>
> This document has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an
> IETF Working Group.
>
> The IESG contact person is Peter Saint-Andre.
>
> A URL of this Internet Draft is:
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic/ 
>
>
>
>
> Technical Summary
>
>    This document registers the mailserver: URI scheme as
>    historic in the IANA URI registry.
>
> Working Group Summary
>
>    This document is not the product of a working group.
>
> Document Quality
>
>    The document cleans out some cruft in the IANA registry
>    and clarifies possible confusion regarding the mailserver:
>    URI scheme, which was never put into use.  This topic was
>    discussed on the URI and Applications Area email lists, and
>    there was wide agreement that this document is helpful.
>
> Personnel
>
>    The Document Shepherd / Responsible Area Director is
>    Peter Saint-Andre.
>
> RFC Editor Note
>
>    Please add the following line to the document header:
>
>       Updates: RFC 1738
>
> _______________________________________________
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>
>
>
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Protocol Action: 'Moving mailserver: URI scheme to historic' to Proposed Standard (draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic-00.txt)

Peter Saint-Andre-2
In reply to this post by Martin J. Dürst
Per RFC 2026, Informational RFCs explicitly do not reflect consensus of
the Internet community:

   An "Informational" specification is published for the general
   information of the Internet community, and does not represent an
   Internet community consensus or recommendation.

However, moving the mailserver URI scheme to historic has consensus.
Therefore, publication of this document as an Informational RFC seems
incorrect, and publication on the standards track seems correct.

Peter

On 1/10/11 5:26 PM, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote:

> Now that I see it right in front of my eyes, I'm quite a bit surprised
> that this document is going to be a Proposed Standard. Was this
> discussed before? Is there a plan to advance it to Draft Standard and
> then Full Standard? Wouldn't Informational be good enough? Can this
> still be fixed?
>
> [If this was already discussed, please ignore this message.]
>
> Regards,   Martin.
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Protocol Action: 'Moving mailserver: URI scheme to historic'
> to    Proposed Standard (draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic-00.txt)
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:49:48 -0800
> From: The IESG <[hidden email]>
> To: IETF-Announce <[hidden email]>
> CC: Internet Architecture Board <[hidden email]>,        RFC Editor
> <[hidden email]>
>
> The IESG has approved the following document:
> - 'Moving mailserver: URI scheme to historic'
>   (draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic-00.txt) as a Proposed
> Standard
>
> This document has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an
> IETF Working Group.
>
> The IESG contact person is Peter Saint-Andre.
>
> A URL of this Internet Draft is:
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-melnikov-mailserver-uri-to-historic/
>
>
>
> Technical Summary
>
>    This document registers the mailserver: URI scheme as
>    historic in the IANA URI registry.
>
> Working Group Summary
>
>    This document is not the product of a working group.
>
> Document Quality
>
>    The document cleans out some cruft in the IANA registry
>    and clarifies possible confusion regarding the mailserver:
>    URI scheme, which was never put into use.  This topic was
>    discussed on the URI and Applications Area email lists, and
>    there was wide agreement that this document is helpful.
>
> Personnel
>
>    The Document Shepherd / Responsible Area Director is
>    Peter Saint-Andre.
>
> RFC Editor Note
>
>    Please add the following line to the document header:
>
>       Updates: RFC 1738
>
> _______________________________________________
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce


smime.p7s (8K) Download Attachment