Re: [ga] Re: [ALSC-Forum] Re: [GTLD Registries List] What is the accreditation status of registrars that made fake applications?

[Sandy Harris <sandy@storm.ca>]

Eric Dierker wrote:

Replying to one list, with insane cc list trimmed.
 
> Thank you for your comments,
> 
> 1.    When should a RFC be disregarded?  What is the criteria?

RFCs come in various categories. Some of them (I'm not sure if this is the
complete list) are:

	experimental
	informational
	best current practices (BCP)
	standards track

Within the standards track, they go through stages. Proposed standard, draft
standard, standard. 

The ones that have made it to actual standard gat an STD number in addition
to their RFC number. They are listed at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcxx00.html

These, you disregard at your peril. They are the official definition of how
the Internet works. 

BCPs and informational RFCs are not standards, but usually worth paying 
some attention to.

Experimental RFCs can be ignored unless you want to participate in the
experiment. For example, there's an experimental RFC for the Photuris
protocol to do key exchange for secure tunnels across the net. A few
people, like the OpenBSD folks, implement Photuris and follow that RFC.
Most people just implement the standards-track IKE protocol instead.

In theory, proposed and draft standards could be ignored. In practice,
quite a few companies or open source projects implement things that
are still in those stages. Sometimes they implement things that are 
still Internet DRafts and haven't even made it to Proposed.

> 2. If circumstances warrant differing from an RFC should one first 
> challenge the existing RFC?

RFCs are frequently replaced, updated, or labelled as obsolete.

If you have a problem with a particular RFC, search for the Working 
Group that deals with it on www.ietf.org, subscribe to their mailing
list, and join discussions leading to an update. All IETF WGs are 
open to anyone interested, a practice I think ICANN should adopt
instead of its restrictive Task Force approach.

However, I very strongly recommend lurking for a few weeks -- getting
a feel for the issues, the tone, and the players -- before posting.
These are Working Groups; political noises that do not contribute
to the work will be rejected, and perhaps not gently. 

So wiil technical nonsense that might be tolerated here. See, for
example, a polite response to Fleming's "ipv8" stuff:
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12576.html
or the more direct ones:
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12577.html
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12603.html
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html