Definition of new tags for relations between RFCs
draft-kuehlewind-update-tag-03
Network Working Group M. Kuehlewind
Internet-Draft Ericsson
Intended status: Best Current Practice S. Krishnan
Expires: May 6, 2021 Kaloom
November 02, 2020
Definition of new tags for relations between RFCs
draft-kuehlewind-update-tag-03
Abstract
An RFC can include a tag called "Updates" which can be used to link a
new RFC to an existing RFC. On publication of such an RFC, the
existing RFC will include an additional metadata tag called "Updated
by" which provides a link to the new RFC. However, this tag pair is
not well-defined and therefore it is currently used for multiple
different purposes, which leads to confusion about the actual meaning
of this tag and inconsistency in its use.
This document recommends the discontinuation of the use of the
updates/updated by tag pair, and instead proposes three new tag pairs
that have well-defined meanings and use cases.
Status of This Memo
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 https://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 May 6, 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 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
Kuehlewind & Krishnan Expires May 6, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft New Tag Definitions November 2020
(https://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. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. New Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Additional Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Discontinuation of the Use of Updates/Updated by . . . . 5
4.2. Amendments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.3. Indication of Linkage in the Abstract and Introduction . 5
5. Future work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Alternative Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction
An RFC can include a tag called "Updates" which can be used to link a
new RFC to an existing RFC. On publication of such an RFC, the
existing RFC will include an additional metadata tag called "Updated
by" which provides a link to the new RFC. However, this tag pair is
not well-defined and therefore it is currently used for multiple
different purposes, which leads to confusion about the actual meaning
of this tag and inconsistency in its use.
The "Updates/Updates by" tag pair is currently used by different
working groups and different areas, which tend to apply different
meanings to it. They also differ greatly about the obligations on
the implementors of the Updated RFC. While updating an RFC never
makes the updated RFC invalid, updates can contain bug fixes or
critical changes. Some groups apply the update tag only to these
kind of changes with the expectation that new implementors are also
obliged to implement this new RFC. Some other groups use the update
tag to define optional extensions or use of extension points in the
current protocol. This disconnect leads to a situation where it is
Show full document text