From: Jeroen Scheerder (js@cwi.nl)
Date: Sun Apr 02 2000 - 07:21:27 CDT
Peter Alfredsen (27-03-2000 19:50 +0200) [Re: OUGHT: Results of Straw
Poll]:
> Even though I am not a regular participator in this discussion, I see
> the need for OUGHT as opposed to splitting up the RFC in a "Good
> housekeeping" and a successor to RFC 1036(bis).
FWIW (he said, barging in on a discussion only marginally followed),
there are a few things maybe worth mentioning here.
* there _is_ a "good housekeeping" document, the GNKSA. Started
by Ron Newman, I'm it's current (passive) maintainer.
* there have been suggestions to formalize that in the form of
a proper RFC.
* whether or not that will ever be done, it is of importance to
synchronize this thing with the 1036-successor(s) in a timely
fashion; its current incarnation will have to go, someday.
* I'm open to suggestions in this regard; *any* suggestion,
up to and including discarding the thing in favour of an
adequate inclusion of "OUGHT"-ish set of requirements within
a USEFOR/MESSFOR context.
* $.02: I do think that, for it to carry some weight, it's
quintessential to have a crystal-clear semantics for such
an imperative normative formal construct, with adequate
support (which is more than just tolerance) at the appropriate
level (i.e. IETF).
Regards, J.