Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard

[ned.freed@mrochek.com]

> for those who have forgotten the history....

> the first version of this was, I think, intended for April 1-like status.
> But quite a few people apparently told dee this looked useful, and he
> should propose it for more serious classification.

> it's one of those that's been in the tracker so long, its entry is not
> recorded in the log.... version -00 is from August 1999, but I can't find
> any sign it caused a reaction at the time.

> Ned - do you have more history notes?

Sure. This document has been last called and reviewed by the IESG before, back
in January 2002. The feedback at the time was that the document was overly
broad in its claims of utility and Donald was asked to tone it down. He has now
done so, although it appears he didn't go far enough to satisfy some people.
Keith Moore in particular seems far more hostile now than he did before.

Another historical point to note is that Dave Crocker submitted basically the
same registration to Postel many years ago as an April Fool's RFC. Postel's
response was that the idea had real utility and hence was inappropriate as an
April Fool's RFC.

As for why I last called it as proposed, I have been told, specifically and
directly, that proposed standard is the appropriate status for MIME type
registration documents dealing  with IETF-defined formats.

I have no real skin in this game, but I do note that media type labels are of
general utility these days and not having one for IP packets seems a bit
peculiar.

				Ned