Subject: Questions about BCPs and WGs

From: Jacob Hoffman-Andrews <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 10:16:45 -0700

Hi IETF folks,

I have a few questions about IETF processes that I hope you all can 
answer. I'm coming at these questions as someone who has participated in 
a number of WGs, co-authored one RFC and one RFC-to-be, but still 
doesn't fully understand the processes.

I'm looking at BCP 190 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp190). How do I 
figure out which WG this document was developed in? It doesn't have a 
working group listed in the header, nor does the corresponding RFC 
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7320).

Also, what's the difference between a BCP and an RFC?

If I look at the document that BCP 190 Updates 
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986) it lists the "Network Working 
Group." What is that? I don't see it listed under 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/.

In general, if I want to discuss amendments to BCP 190, what mailing 
list would I use to start that conversation?

Thanks,
Jacob

---

From: Michael StJohns <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 13:22:18 -0400

On 7/10/2019 1:16 PM, Jacob Hoffman-Andrews wrote:
> answer. I'm coming at these questions as someone who has participated 
> in a number of WGs, co-authored one RFC and one RFC-to-be, but still 
Look it up on the tracker by its RFC number: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7320/

Note that the ID versions listed include "draft-ietf-appsawg-..." which 
appears to indicate Apps Area WG.

Mike

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 18:56:55 +0100

> On 10 Jul 2019, at 18:22, Michael StJohns <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
>> I have a few questions about IETF processes that I hope you all can answer. I'm coming at these questions as someone who has participated in a number of WGs, co-authored one RFC and one RFC-to-be, but still doesn't fully understand the processes.
>> 
>> I'm looking at BCP 190 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp190). How do I figure out which WG this document was developed in? It doesn't have a working group listed in the header, nor does the corresponding RFC (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7320).
>> 
>> If I look at the document that BCP 190 Updates (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986) it lists the "Network Working Group." What is that? I don't see it listed under https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/.
>> 
>> In general, if I want to discuss amendments to BCP 190, what mailing list would I use to start that conversation?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Jacob
>> 
> Look it up on the tracker by its RFC number: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7320/
> 
> Note that the ID versions listed include "draft-ietf-appsawg-..." which appears to indicate Apps Area WG.

Right. So further discussions of BCP 190 should happen on [email-masked].

---

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 15:14:06 -0400

Jacob,

A "BCP" is one of several types of RFC. BCPs are used to document a "Best
Current Practice" in the IETF or the Internet. They are described in
section 5 of https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026 .

The "Network Working Group" was the historical original source of RFCs
prior to the IETF. The "Network Working Group" attribution in RFCs was kept
for many years in the IETF as a sort of homage. Lately, as you've noticed,
it's been updated to "IETF".

As others have noted, you should bring up this discussion on "[email-masked]".

But you picked the right first place to ask!

Cheers,
Andy

---

From: Jacob Hoffman-Andrews <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 10:27:37 -0700

On 7/10/19 12:14 PM, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
 > The "Network Working Group" was the historical original source of 
RFCs prior to the IETF. The "Network Working Group" attribution in RFCs 
was kept for many years in the IETF as a sort of homage. Lately, as 
you've noticed, it's been updated to "IETF".

Thanks, this is very informative! I think it would make sense to and 
"network" to https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/ as a sort of "virtual" 
working group that exists solely to document that the "Network Working 
Group" no longer exists.

It also seems like it's common practice for Individual Drafts to be 
attributed to the Network Working Group. See, for instance, 
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-koster-rep-00.txt. I realize it's hard to 
enforce changes on Individual Drafts, but perhaps there's guidance we 
could publish somewhere to discourage this confusing practice?

Thanks,
Jacob

---

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 13:14:50 -0700

Hi Jacob,
At 10:27 AM 11-07-2019, Jacob Hoffman-Andrews wrote:
>working group that exists solely to document that the "Network 
>Working Group" no longer exists.

There is information about the structural elements in RFC 5741 and 
there is a reference to that document in RFC 7320.  The source of the 
BCP, which was a working group, is identified at 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp190

Regards,
S. Moonesamy