> -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Newton (andy) <a...@hxr.us> > Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2024 2:10 PM > To: James Galvin <gal...@elistx.com> > Cc: regext@ietf.org > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] Re: normative language and references in draft- > ietf-regext-delete-bcp > > Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click > links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > > This is done. In addition, I noted the informative reference to RFC > 3915 has changed to normative.
[SAH] Andy, I'd like to suggest one addition to the added text. You added this: "Additionally, there were discussion regarding the use of BCPs to suggest practices that are not know to be practiced. In other words, how can a BCP normatively require a practice that has not been observed because it is not a "current" practice." When this came up on-list, I noted that this type of situation is addressed in RFC 2026: "A BCP document is subject to the same basic set of procedures as standards track documents and thus is a vehicle by which the IETF community can define and ratify the community's best current thinking on a statement of principle or on what is believed to be the best way to perform some operations or IETF process function." Note where it says "what is believed to be the best way to perform some operations or IETF process function". Found here: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/bNqpUibJuzZMB42APSv_tsnFxNo/ Would you please add something like "It was noted that RFC 2026 permits BCPs to describe what is believed to be the best way to perform some operations or IETF process function" to the end of the new text. Scott _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org
