[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Last Call: Instructions to Request for Comments (RFC) Authors to BCP
- To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
- Subject: Re: Last Call: Instructions to Request for Comments (RFC) Authors to BCP
- From: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>
- Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 09:07:35 -0800 (PST)
- Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
- In-reply-to: <200303042320.SAA14940@ietf.org>
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, The IESG wrote:
>
> The IESG has received a request to consider Instructions to Request for
> Comments (RFC) Authors <draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-04.txt> as a BCP.
> This has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an IETF
> Working Group.
>
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the
> iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2003-4-8.
I would like to offer the following comments on this draft.
1.) Section 4 of the draft lists the required sections of an RFC,
but an Intellectual Property section is not among them. According
to RFC 2026 Section 10.4, standards-track documents are required to
have certain IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) notices, and making
certain that an IPR section is present has long been customary in
OPS area reviews of MIB specifications. One could argue, I suppose,
that this does not need special mention, and the IPR section could
just be part of the body of an RFC; however, in view of the fact
that the IPR notices required by RFC 2026 are missing from some
recent standards-track documents (e.g., RFC 3407), perhaps it might
be better to have it called out as a separate section (both in
Section 4 and in the checklist in Appendix C) and to note that it is
required for standards-track documents.
2.) Some of the section numbers in the checklist in Appendix C are
not correct. A context diff showing the necessary corrections
(along with those for a few typos I happened to notice) is attached.
Regards,
Mike Heard
*** draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-04.txt Fri Feb 28 08:51:50 2003
--- draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-xx.txt Fri Mar 7 00:06:49 2003
***************
*** 575,581 ****
simultaneous publication of a group of inter-related RFCs.
An RFC must include separate lists of normative and informative
! references (see Section 4.8 below.)
Some standards track document use certain capitalized words
("MUST", "SHOULD", etc.) to specify precise requirement-levels for
--- 575,581 ----
simultaneous publication of a group of inter-related RFCs.
An RFC must include separate lists of normative and informative
! references (see Section 4.12 below.)
Some standards track document use certain capitalized words
("MUST", "SHOULD", etc.) to specify precise requirement-levels for
***************
*** 807,813 ****
control characters CR, LF, and FF are allowed.
Notes: CR and LF must be used only as provided in rule
! (2), and LF must be used only as provided in rule (3).
Tab (HT) characters and Backspace (BS) characters are
never allowed (hence there can be no underlining; see
(4) below).
--- 807,813 ----
control characters CR, LF, and FF are allowed.
Notes: CR and LF must be used only as provided in rule
! (2), and FF must be used only as provided in rule (3).
Tab (HT) characters and Backspace (BS) characters are
never allowed (hence there can be no underlining; see
(4) below).
***************
*** 1238,1244 ****
The Copyright Notice section consists of the statement, "Copyright
(C) The Internet Society (date). All Rights Reserved." and is
! required. The Full Copyright Statement described in Section 4.12
must also appear at the end of the document.
4.4 IESG Note
--- 1238,1244 ----
The Copyright Notice section consists of the statement, "Copyright
(C) The Internet Society (date). All Rights Reserved." and is
! required. The Full Copyright Statement described in Section 4.14
must also appear at the end of the document.
4.4 IESG Note
***************
*** 1348,1354 ****
Internet-Draft Instructions to RFC Authors 10 Feb 2003
! See [15} for IESG guidance on the use of formal languages in RFCs.
4.8 Contributors Section
--- 1348,1354 ----
Internet-Draft Instructions to RFC Authors 10 Feb 2003
! See [15] for IESG guidance on the use of formal languages in RFCs.
4.8 Contributors Section
***************
*** 1641,1650 ****
2. All abbreviations (with a few exceptions) are | 4.7
expanded when they first appear. |
|
! 3. References: | 2.7, 4.8
> Complete and current |
> Normative and Informative listed separately | 2.7
! > Internet Drafts correctly referenced | 4.8
|
4. All URLs are suspect: they must be stable. | 2.8
|
--- 1641,1650 ----
2. All abbreviations (with a few exceptions) are | 4.7
expanded when they first appear. |
|
! 3. References: | 2.7, 4.12
> Complete and current |
> Normative and Informative listed separately | 2.7
! > Internet Drafts correctly referenced | 4.12
|
4. All URLs are suspect: they must be stable. | 2.8
|
***************
*** 1701,1709 ****
C. Required Sections | 4
|
1. Status of Memo | 4.2
! > Choose text appropriate to Category | App. B
|
! 2. Copyright Notice | 4.3
|
3. Abstract | 4.5
> Clarity and content OK |
--- 1701,1709 ----
C. Required Sections | 4
|
1. Status of Memo | 4.2
! > Choose text appropriate to Category | App. A
|
! 2. Copyright Notice | 4.3, 4.14
|
3. Abstract | 4.5
> Clarity and content OK |
***************
*** 1712,1718 ****
> No references |
> Unnumbered section |
|
! 4. Security Considerations | 4.9
|
5. Authors' Addresses | 4.13
|
--- 1712,1718 ----
> No references |
> Unnumbered section |
|
! 4. Security Considerations | 4.10
|
5. Authors' Addresses | 4.13
|
***************
*** 1723,1731 ****
2. Table of Contents | 4.6
> Must be present in large document |
|
! 3. IANA Considerations, if needed | 4.10
!
! 4. Contributors and/or Acknowledgments | 4.11, 4.12
--- 1723,1731 ----
2. Table of Contents | 4.6
> Must be present in large document |
|
! 3. IANA Considerations, if needed | 4.11
! |
! 4. Contributors and/or Acknowledgments | 4.8, 4.9