Network Working Group | S. Farrell |
Internet-Draft | Trinity College Dublin |
Intended status: Standards Track | December 01, 2012 |
Expires: June 04, 2013 |
A Fast-Track way to Proposed Standard with Running Code
draft-farrell-ft-00
This memo proposes an optional fast-track way to get from a working group document to IESG review that can be used for cases when a working group chair believes that there is open-source running code that implements a working group Internet-Draft. The basic idea is to do all of working group last call, IETF last call and area director review during the same two week period, and to impose a higher barrier for comments that might block progress. The motivation is to offer a reward for running code, consistent with the IETF's overall philosophy of running code and rough consensus. This version is an initial draft solely proposed by the author (and not the IESG) to attempt to ascertain if there is enough interest in this to warrant trying out the idea as an RFC 3933 process experiment.
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at http:/⁠/⁠datatracker.ietf.org/⁠drafts/⁠current/⁠.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 04, 2013.
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http:/⁠/⁠trustee.ietf.org/⁠license-⁠info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document.
This is an initial draft solely proposed by the author (and not the IESG) to attempt to ascertain if there is enough interest in this to warrant trying out the idea as an [RFC3933] experiment.
The idea here is not to save the universe, nor to boil any oceans. WG's are still liable to sometimes take years to get to the point where this "fastrack" might apply. However, the author thinks that this is taking the IETF in the right direction and so is worth a look. This approach might also help with recent cases where smaller open-source software groups have found the IETF process difficult for various reasons.
Sometimes, it can take a long time to get a Proposed Standard produced in the IETF. This memo proposes an optional way to speed up the parts of the process that happen after a working group (WG) has done its job as a "reward" for having an open-source implementation available at that time.
There is probably no need to refer to [RFC2119] here, but why not:-)
The basic idea is that a WG chair can choose to progress a WG draft on the "fast-track" in some circumstances.
When a document is being progressed on the fast-track, the following changes from [BCP9] apply, and define the new "fast-track last call" state:
Some rules associated with this new fast-track are as follows:
[[To be removed, there aren't any.]]
Since this is proposed by a security AD something is clearly needed here. A WG chair and author could collude to launch an attack on the WG's AD by proposing a draft with code containing a trojan. Not much fun or profit for anyone there though:-)
Sean Turner provided some useful changes to an earlier version. [[More later is this is dead-on-arrival.]]
[BCP9] | Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, RFC 6410, October 1996. |
[DCRIT] | IESG, , "Discuss Criteria in IESG Review", July 2007. |
[RFC2119] | Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. |
[RFC3933] | Klensin, J. and S. Dawkins, "A Model for IETF Process Experiments", BCP 93, RFC 3933, November 2004. |