Process for Handling Non-Major Revisions to Existing RFCs
draft-roach-bis-documents-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2019-05-07
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Working Group                                           A. Roach
Internet-Draft                                                   Mozilla
Intended status: Best Current Practice                      May 07, 2019
Expires: November 8, 2019

       Process for Handling Non-Major Revisions to Existing RFCs
                      draft-roach-bis-documents-00

Abstract

   This document discusses mechanisms the IETF has historically used for
   updating RFCs subsequent to their publication, and outlines an
   updated procedure for publishing newer versions (colloquially known
   as "bis versions") that is appropriate in certain circumstances.
   This procedure is expected to be easier for both authors and
   consumers of RFCs.

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 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 November 8, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 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.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of

Roach                   Expires November 8, 2019                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft         Minor -bis Document Process              May 2019

   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Processing for Revised Documents  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  Basic Qualifications  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.2.  Document Evaluation Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.3.  Deprecated Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Implications for Other Documents  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  To-Do . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   8.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Introduction

   [RFC2026] defines the Internet Standards Process, largely focusing on
   the handling of the RFC publication process.  Part of this process as
   originally envisioned includes republication of documents under a
   number of circumstances, such as when a document is progressed
   towards Internet Standard status.  The circumstances that
   necessitated republication originally also included various fixes to
   the contents of the documents; for example, RFC 2026 specifies:

      [A]n important typographical error, or a technical error that does
      not represent a change in overall function of the specification,
      may need to be corrected immediately.  In such cases, the IESG or
      RFC Editor may be asked to republish the RFC (with a new number)
      with corrections...

   In the intervening years since the publication of RFC 2026, various
   additional mechanisms have emerged to deal with minor updates to
   existing, published RFCs.  The RFC Editor maintains a set of errata
   associated with published documents.  These errata are intended for
   use when the intention of the document can be deduced, but the
   expression of the intention is imperfect (e.g., it contains a
   typographical error or is ambiguous in its phrasing).  Notably,
   errata cannot be used to change the intended meaning of a document
   from that which was originally intended.

Roach                   Expires November 8, 2019                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft         Minor -bis Document Process              May 2019

   Additionally, it is increasingly common to publish new, relatively
Show full document text