Handling Normative References to Standards-Track Documents
RFC 4897

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: Internet Architecture Board <iab@iab.org>,
    RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Handling Normative References to 
         Standards Track Documents' to BCP 

The IESG has approved the following document:

- 'Handling Normative References to Standards Track Documents '
   <draft-klensin-norm-ref-05.txt> as a BCP

This document has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an
IETF Working Group. 

The IESG contact person is Russ Housley.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-klensin-norm-ref-05.txt

Technical Summary
 
  This document describes a process update in which the "hold
  on normative reference" rule for references to a document of
  lower maturity level will be replaced by a "note downward
  normative reference and move on" approach.  This is simpler
  than the approach already defined in RFC 3967.  It still does
  not allow normative references to unapproved drafts.  This
  document is an update to BCP 97.
 
Working Group Summary
   
  This was originally proposed as a more complex RFC 3933 process
  experiment. There was significant discussion during IETF Last 
  Call, mainly to clarify scope of the experiment. However,
  the IESG concluded that the issue was well enough understood
  to update the process definitively and the document was
  re-oriented in simpler form as a BCP. In the second IETF Last
  Call, the community suported this direction.
 
Protocol Quality
 
  This document was reviewed by Brian Carpenter and Russ Housley.

Note to RFC Editor

  Please make this document part of BCP 97.

  Please remove section 9 prior to publication.
 
  Please delete the following from Section 1:

  DELETE:

    While downward references to, e.g., Internet Drafts, are
    theoretically possible, they are not contemplated here.

  Please correct the typo in section 3.2:

  OLD:

    ... should insure that appropriate review ...

  NEW:

    ... should ensure that appropriate review ...